Haryana Urban Development Authority and another vs Rajpal Khanna

This appeal arises out of the order dated 12.4.2001 passed by the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

The State Commission went into the question of escalation of cost of construction in computing the compensation to be granted to the complainant, which according to the complainant, came to Rs. 13.5 lakhs. The basis for arriving at Rs. 13.5 lakhs was an affidavit of one Mr. S. K. Kharbanda, surveyor, who had given his estimates. The said claim was countered by the H.U.D.A. They say that the escalation in the cost of construction of a house should be worked out on the basis of the cost of construction index of the C.P.W.D. in 1982 and 1994 and requested that the matter be got determined through the good offices of the C.P.W.D. The State Commission did not agree to it, nor did the Commission accept the Surveyor s report and felt that the ends of justice will be met if a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000 is awarded in favour of the complainant plus litigation expenses of Rs. 5,000 instead of Rs. 25,000 which was claimed by the complainant. The fact of delay in delivery of possession is not in dispute. In the light of this, we find that there is no infirmity in the impugned order which is upheld. The revision petition is dismissed.