HUDA vs S.K.WASON

THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 7.11.2002 passed by the District Consumer Redressal Forum, Gurgaon whereby while accepting the complaint of the respondent-complainants direction has been given to the appellant-opposite party to pay interest @ 18% over the deposited amount of the complainant till the date of electric pole is removed from the Industrial Plot allotted to the complainant.

PUT shortly the facts of the case are that an industrial plot No. 108 measuring 458 sq. metres located in Pace City-I, Gurgaon was allotted to the complainant as per memo No. 127 dated 20.2.1995. The possession of the plot was given to the complainant vide memo No. 767 dated 22.3.1995. At the time of delivery of possession of the plot an electric pole with high tension wire was located in the middle of the plot for which the complainant objected and he was assured by the opposite party to remove the same within a period of three months thereafter. The said pole was not removed within that period with the result the complainant approached again the opposite party to do the needful. In the meanwhile he also got the plan sanctioned on 2.11.1998 for setting up an industrial unit. He again approached the opposite party to remove the electric pole as he was carrying out the construction work started but because of the hindrance of the electric pole he could not start. The opposite party failed to remove the said pole. The case of the complainant is that he paid a sum of Rs. 3,68,690 towards the cost of the plot in question but did not serve any purpose for him and accordingly he invoked the jurisdiction of the District Forum seeking direction against the opposite party to pay interest suffered by him and Rs. 2,00,000 on account of losing of his business and failure to instal industrial unit. He also claimed interest @ 24% per annum on the deposited amount and Rs. 2 lacs for mental agony and physical harassment caused to him from 22.3.1995 till date amount is paid to him. The claim was contested by the opposite party. In the written statement filed it was not disputed that the industrial plot in question was allotted to the complainant and the possession of the plot was also delivered to him on 22.3.1995. It was further averred by the opposite party that the electric pole is located in the corner of the plot in question and no objection was raised by him at the time he took the possession of the plot. While controverting the other stand taken by the complainant it was pleaded that there was no deficiency of service on its part and for that reason the complaint merited dismissal. The District Forum on appraisal of the pleadings of the parties and evidence adduced on record, accepted the complaint and issued the direction to the opposite party as detailed in the earlier part of this order. It is against this order the present appeal has been filed.

Learned Counsel for the parties have been heard at length.

IN this case the allotment of the industrial plot No. 108, Pace City-I, Gurgaon was made to the complainant by the opposite party as per letter dated 20.2.1995. It is also admitted by the opposite party that possession of the plot was handed over to the complainant on 22.3.1995 and at that time the electric pole containing high-tension wire was in existence. According to the opposite party that pole is located in the corner of the plot while as per version of the complainant, it is located in the middle of the plot. The complainant has also got the site plan sanctioned so that he could complete his industrial unit at the site but the opposite party failed to remove the electric pole which is located in the centre of the plot, as is clearly proved on the basis of photographs and other evidence produced on record. It is not the case of the opposite party that at the time when the complaint was filed, the pole from the said plot had been removed by them. The stand of the complainant that he had deposited the amount of Rs. 3,68,690 towards the cost of the plot in question, is not disputed by the opposite party. As the electric pole has been in existence in the middle of the plot, it was not possible for the complainant to carry out the construction of the building of the industrial unit as it was likely to pose health hazards to the workers and other persons at the site. There is definitely a deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party and it has resulted in harassment to the complainant. So much so, he has not been able to carry out the construction of the industrial unit and thus has not been able to utilize the benefit of the amount invested by him in the industrial plot. The District Forum while accepting the complaint has awarded interest at the rate of 18% per annum which is on the higher side, the same is reduced to 12% instead of 18% per annum over the amount deposited by the complainant till the date the pole located in the plot in question is removed by the opposite party. With the above modification in the order of the District Forum, the appeal is disposed of accordingly. Appeal disposed of.