Estate Officer, Haryana Urban Development Authority vs H.G.BHATIA

ESTATE Officer, Haryana Urban Development Authority, Faridabad (hereinafter referred as HUDA) has come up in appeal against the order of the District Forum, Faridabad dated 19.2.1998 vide which the District Forum on a complaint filed by H.G. Bhatia issued direction to the HUDA to withdraw the notice dated 2.8.1996 demanding Rs. 22,515/- and to overhaul the account of the complainant by charging interest not from the year 1986 but from the date of notice issued in November, 1993 on the amount then outstanding.

THE challenge to the impugned order is that as and when there was enhancement of price notice to the complainant was issued for the payment of the enhanced compensation and it could not be said that no notice was ever given to the complainant to pay the enhanced compensation. THE Counsel for the appellant has also argued that the District Forum had no jurisdiction to interfere in the matter on the question of payment of enhanced price. Notice of the appeal was issued and in pursuance of which the complainant has put in appearance through his Counsel, who has pleaded that there is no illegality in the impugned order and the appeal deserves to be dismissed. The Commission has considered the submissions of the Counsel of both sides and has also perused the impugned order. From the perusal of record, we have observed that the complainant had made payment of the tentative cost of the plot measuring 250 sq. yards and had also paid a sum of Rs. 825/- demanded on account of additional area as well as first and second instalments ordered by various Courts. The possession of the plot was delivered to the complainant on 25.1.1982 and he had completed the construction in the year 1984 and was issued completion certificate in that very year. It is evident that first notice to the complainant was received in respect of third enhancement on 30.1.1986 asking him to pay Rs. 5,461/- at the rate of Rs. 21.14 P. per square yard. However, the enhanced price was reduced to Rs. 17.20 and on that account a fresh notice dated 3.2.1989 was issued to the complainant asking him to pay Rs. 4,445/-. The complainant again received a notice on 11.11.1991 for payment of Rs. 5,990/- on account of extension fee and this amount was reduced to Rs. 4,100/- vide notice dated 12.5.1992. It is pertinent to note that the complainant brought to the notice of the opposite party-HUDA that he had raised construction on the plot in the year 1984 and there was no justification for charging extension fee. However, the demand notice was withdrawn by HUDA.

It is pertinent to note that the complainant was again asked vide letter dated 28.8.1992 to pay Rs. 5,725/- at the rate of Rs. 22.15 per square yard. However, this amount was not paid by the complainant. The complainant again received a notice dated 20.9.1993 asking him to pay Rs. 23,950/-. This amount also included Rs. 4,445/- alongwith interest thereon of Rs. 7,906/- from the year 1986 to 1993 amounting Rs. 12,350/- plus Rs. 5,000/- on account of interest on the original price of Rs. 825/- for additional area of 8.34 square yards and he was also asked to pay Rs. 6,600/-. The complainant had conceded that he had not made payment of third and fourth instalments because of the stay having been granted by the Hon''ble Punjab and Haryana High Court. The stay was vacated in the year 1992 with the direction to issue a fresh notice to the complainant and in pursuance of which, HUDA had issued notice to the complainant in November, 1993. Since the complainant could not make payment of the enhanced price because of the stay granted by the Hon''ble Punjab and Haryana High Court and on the vacation of the stay, the opposite party had issued notice to the complainant in November, 1993, the Commission is of the considered view that the complainant is liable to pay the interest only from November, 1993 when notice was issued to the complainant after vacation of the stay by the Hon''ble High Court and not earlier to that. In view of the above dicussions, we find no merit in the appeal and is hereby dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.