AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
8 paragraphs · 741 words- HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the respondent in person.
UNDISPUTEDLY, the complainant applied for a residential plot in Sector-64, Faridabad which was to be developed by the petitioner/huda. As per the brochure of Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) for allotment of free hold residential plots in Sector-64, Faridabad, it is provided that : ''possession of the plots shall be delivered to the allottees in about three years of the date of allotment. However possession may be given earlier, if the development of basic services in a scheme is completed before the above mentioned period. At the time of offer of possession, only the basic services i. e. water supply, approach road, sewerage and electrification shall be made available in the sector. '' As the plot was not delivered to the complainant after allotment letter dated 19. 12. 2000, within the stipulated period of three years, the complainant approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Faridabad, by filing Consumer Complaint No. 177/2004.
That complaint was allowed by the District Forum vide order dated 23. 8. 2005 and the petitioner/huda was directed to refund the amount deposited by the complainant with interest at the rate of 12% p. a. w. e. f. the date of deposit till its realization.
AGAINST that order, petitioner preferred First Appeal No. 2201 of 2005 before the State Commission and the State Commission vide judgment and order dated 24. 1. 2006 dismissed the appeal. Against that order, this revision petition is filed.
IT is stated that during the pendency of the proceeding before the District Forum petitioner moved Transfer Petition No. 01/2005 before this Commission on various grounds. When the transfer petition came up for hearing, appeal preferred by the petitioner was heard and the judgment was reserved by the State Commission. Hence this Commission dismissed the transfer petition. Undisputedly, in the present case, during the pendency of this revision petition, on 26. 6. 2006, HUDA delivered the possession of the plot to the complainant and that possession was also accepted by the complainant. The only question which requires consideration is whether any amount of compensation should be awarded to the complainant for delay in delivering the possession of the plot by the HUDA. The complainant who appeared in person pointed out that even though there was delay on the part of the HUDA in developing the plots and delivering the possession, they have recovered Rs. 66,407 from him towards interest for delayed payment of instalments. For this purpose, complainant has relied upon the letter dated 13. 6. 2006 wherein he has informed the Estate Officer, Faridabad that he was sending draft for a sum of Rs. 66,407 by way of interest payable for delayed payment of instalments. He further submits that the delay in delivering the possession, is more than two years and six months, therefore, compensation should be awarded to him.
IN the present case, the complainant has prayed that as the HUDA has recovered interest at the rate of 15% p. a. from him on the delayed instalments, hence the HUDA should be directed to pay interest at the same rate on the amount deposited by him. He has pointed out that a sum of Rs. 3,85,938 was deposited by him from 19. 12. 2003 to 7. 6. 2006. Hence from 19. 12. 2003 to 7. 6. 2006 interest be awarded. Similarly, for the amount of Rs. 1,61,128 interest should be paid from 12. 9. 2005 to 7. 6. 2006. And in any case, the HUDA be directed to refund the amount of Rs. 66,407 which was recovered from him as interest for delay in paying installments.
IN our view, considering the fact that there was delay in delivering the possession, on the basis of the promise given by the HUDA in its brochure, which is produced on record by the complainant and the term which is quoted above, it would be just and proper to direct the petitioner to refund the interest charged by it from the complainant on delayed payment of installments. In the result, the order passed by the State Commission confirming the order passed by the District Forum is modified. The Petitioner is directed to refund the amount of Rs. 66,407 to the Complainant within a period of four weeks from today.
The revision petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. Revision Petition disposed of.