State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Huda vs Ranbir Singh on 28 July, 2010
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA First Appeal No.1566 of 2009 Date of Institution:29.10.2009 Date of Decision:28.07.2010 1. Chief Administrator, HUDA, C-6, Sector-6, Panchkula. 2. Administrator, HUDA, Rohtak. 3. Estate Officer, HUDA, Rohtak. Appellants Versus. Ranbir Singh s/o Sh. Giriraj Singh, r/o H.No.1207, Sector-1, Rohtak. .Respondent Present:- Mr. Raman Garu, Adv. for the appellants. Mr. Dinesh Arora, Adv. for the respondent. BEFORE: Honble Mr. Justice R.S. Madan, President. Dr. Rekha Sharma, Member Mr. Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member. O R D E R
JUSTICE, R.S. MADAN, PRESIDENT:-
On the application moved on behalf of the applicant/respondent, this appeal is preponed from 16.5.2011 for today and is being disposed of at the request of counsel for the both the parties.
The admitted case of the parties are that Plot No.1207, Sector-1, HUDA, Rohtak was re-allotted to Smt. Dayawanti w/o Sh. Lakhi Ram, who had executed a Will in favour of her brother Sh. Ranbir Singh the present complainant. Smt. Dayawant died on 3.4.1997. On the strength of the aforesaid Will, the complainant has applied with the opposite parties for the transfer of plot No.1207, Sector-1, Rohtak in his favour. Since there are other legal heirs of Smt. Dayawanit, the opposite parties have raised the objection for the transfer of the plot in favour of the complainant and directed him to get the probate/later of administration from the Civil Court, because it involves the civil rights of the legal heirs.
The District Forum was of the view that complainant has already filed affidavit of all the legal heirs of Smt. Dayawanti showing no objection to the transfer of the plot in question in his name. Hence, the District Forum has accepted the complaint and granted the following relief to the complainant:-
We hereby allow the present complaint with direction to the complainant to submit the original Will and also to deposit the requisite fee (if not deposited) in the office of opposite party No.3 within 15 days and thereafter, opposite parties are directed to transfer the plot in question in favour of the complainant maximum within 15 days from the date of depositing of original Will and requisite fee by the complainant and also to pay litigation expenses of Rs.1500/- (Rupees) one thousand five hundred only) to the complainant.
Aggrieved by the order passed by the District Forum, appellants/opposite parties have filed the present appeal before this Commission.
During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the respondent has agreed to seek probate/later of administration from the Civil Court, upon which, appellants-opposite parties have no objection in transferring the plot in the name of the complainant.
In this view of the matter, we set aside the impugned order passed by the District Forum and disposed of this appeal with the direction that on furnishing of probate/later of administration issued by the Civil Court in favour of the complainant, appellant-HUDA would take appropriate steps for transfer of the plot in the name of the complainant within one month. There will be no order as to cost.
The statutory amount of Rs.750/- deposited by the appellants at the time of filing of the appeal is ordered to be released to the appellants after proper receipt, identification and verification.
28th July, 2010 Justice R.S. Madan.
President.
Dr. Rekha Sharma Member Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member