State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Pinky vs Haryana Urban Development Authority ... on 27 July, 2023
Daily Order STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA PANCHKULA First Appeal No.703 of 2023 Date of the Institution:05.07.2023 Date of Order: 27.07.2023 Mrs. Pinky W/o Mr.Vikram Singh Rana R/o Plot No.209, Sector-32, Urban Estate Ambala Cantonment Distt. Ambala .....Appellant Versus 1. Haryana Urban Development Authority, through Estate Oficer,Sector-7, Ambala City, Haryana. 2. Chief Administrator, Haryana Urban Development Authority, Head Office,C-3, Sector-6, Panchkula Distt. Haryana. .....Respondents CORAM: S.P.Sood, Judicial Member Present:- Mr.Amol Jain, , Advocate for the appellant. O R D E R
S P SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
The present appeal has been preferred against the impugned order dated 03.04.2023 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ambala vide which the complaint was dismissed.
2. Briefly stated, facts put forth in the complaint goes like that the complainant purchased a plot No.209 Sector 32, Urban Estate, Ambala Cantt from its previous allottee in the year 2014. On 04.12.2017, the complainant got approved the site plan for raising construction thereon. The complainant also raised house loan from HDFC Bank for construction of this house. In the meantime, One Rajeev Sharma's son Mr.Surendra Sharma filed a civil suit NO.143 of 2017 titled Rajeev Sharma vs HUDA and obtained one sided stay, in which husband of complainant was also arrayed as defendant No.2. The civil suit was filed before Civil Judge, Senior division Ambala Haryana wherein HUDA was impleaded as defendant No.1, it has been stated that in the north and south side of the plot, the road belongs to HUDA and someone has a house there. In Civil Suit,Rajeev Sharma has challenged about 6x10 sq. feet of land of the plot in question by impleading husband of the complainant Sh.Vikram Singh Rana and the matter was sub judice before Civil Court, Ambala. The said plaintiff in the civil court also submitted that land was acquired by HUDA in the year 2000 for urban development, in the south side of land inadvertently, the plaintiff and his father constructed his house in the year 2003 requested HUDA to release the said disputed portion of land but HUDA did not release the land till today. The complainant also filed civil writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court, Chandigarh wherein the court ordered to resolve the matter amicable. This is how Rajeev Sharma and his family have been residing in the part of that illegal house, which was raised on a portion of encroached land, which was criminal and punishable offence according to section 441,447, 448 IPC. Faced with this situation, she got served a notice upon concerned functionaries of the OP, but to no avail. Due to negligent behaviour of Ops complainant was unnecessarily dragged into unwanted litigation. The complainant suffered loss of Rs.8,00,000/-. Thus there was deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, hence the complaint.
3. Notice was issued to the OPs and after appearance filed written version submitting that complaint was not found to be maintainable as one civil suit No.CS/143 of 2018 titled Rajiv Sharma Vs. HUDA and Vikram Singh Rana (Husband of complainant) was already pending in the Civil court, Ambala, regarding the same matter as also mentioned in this very complaint filed by the complainant. The said civil suit was filed in the year 2018 in which complainant's husband was made party but present complaint has been filed on 30.12.2021 which is otherwise also time barred. Vide letter dated 25.06.2018 addressed to HUDA, the complainant had mentioned that "this to bring your knowledge as per court order she has already come up to DPC level of Plot No.209,Sectore 32, Ambala Cantt. and will start further construction and requested to consider this fact and provide covered area DPC Certificate", which shows that complainant has covered entire area of Plot No.209 etc. so there was no reason for her to have filed this complaint. On merits, the previous allottee Mr. Parveen Goel has taken the possession of the plot vide memo N.1538 dated 19.02.2010. When the civil court has granted stay in favour of Rajiv Sharma then how OPs can remove the encroachment. Thus there was no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4. After hearing both the parties, District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ambala dismissed the complaint vide impugned order dated 03.04.2023.
5. Feeling aggrieved therefrom, complainant-appellant has preferred this appeal for setting aside the impugned order.
6. This argument was advanced by Sh.Amol Jain, learned counsel for the appellants. With his kind assistance entire record of the appeal file was properly perused and examined.
7. It is not disputed that complainant subsequently purchased the plot NO.209, Setor 32 Ambala Cantt from its previous allottee. It is also not disputed that civil suit regarding the passage/encroachment was pending in Civil Court and Civil Court which had granted stay in this case. Since the matter was sub judice before the Civil Court, Ambala, this commission has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the complaint or appeal. Moreover complainant being subsequent purchaser therefore could always has the complete knowledge of all the facts and circumstances pertaining to this plot number 209 by going ahead to buy it from original allottee. Added thereto when she is in possession of complete area of this plot No.209 then what is her grouse to initiate this litigation. The learned District Commission has rightly dismissed the complaint.
8. Resultantly, the contentions raised on behalf of the present appellant stands rejected as rendered no assistance and found to be untenable and the order passed by the learned District Commission does not suffer from any illegality or perversity and is well reasoned and accordingly stands maintained for all intents and purposes. Hence, the appeal stand dismissed on merits.
9. Application(s) pending, if any, stand disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order.
10. A copy of this order be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. This order be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.
11. File be consigned to record room.
27th July, 2023 S. P. Sood Judicial Member S.K (Pvt. Secy.)