H.U.D.A. vs KIRSHNA DEVI

THE revision petition is filed by the petitioner, HUDA aggrieved by the order of Haryana State Commission and District Forum, Kaithal.

BRIEF facts of the case are that the respondent/complainant was allotted a plot in December, 1994, possession of the plot was given in July, 1996 without much development. Respondent/complainant approached the District Forum seeking various reliefs on account of delayed delivery of possession as well as on the ground that the petitioner has no right to keep escalating the price of the plot from time to time. The District Forum after hearing both the parties directed payment of Rs. 30,000/- as escalation - in cost of construction on account of late delivery of possession by the petitioner and Rs. 5,000/- as compensation for mental agony. On appeal filed by the petitioner HUDA, compensation was reduced to Rs. 2,000/- while maintaining rest of the order. It is in these circumstances, that the revision petition has been filed before us. Main ground of revision petition is that there has been hardly any delay on the part of the HUDA hence escalation in cost granted by District Forum and sustained by the State Commission is not sustainable, hence need to be set aside.

Undisputed facts are that the petitioner allotted a plot to the respondent/complainant on 9.12.1994. It is also not in dispute that the complainant paid the money due in time. It is also not in dispute that as per Condition No. 7, petitioner was to deliver the possession within 90 days from the issuance of the allotment letter. What we see is that the possession was delivered only on 9.7.1996 i.e. after a delay of about 16 months. There is no doubt in our mind that cost of construction would have escalated during this period for which Rs. 30,000/- has been awarded to somewhat neutralize the cost escalation. This Commission has been awarding interest @ 18% in the deposited amount. Had that route been followed, amount payable by petitioner would have worked out to much more. There is no doubt in our mind that there has been a delay in delivery of plot which amounts to deficiency in service. The amount of compensation already stands reduced to Rs. 2,000/-. We find no illegality in the order passed by the lower FORA. This revision petition is dismissed. No orders as to costs. Revision Petition dismissed.