The presence of obstacles on the purchased property, hindering its use, entitled the petitioner to interest on the deposited amount.

HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN, J.

CM-16777-CWP-2019

Application has been filed for fixing the case to some actual date and to place on record some documents as Annexures P-4 to P-7.

In view of the averments made in the application, same is allowed. Case is taken up on Board for hearing today itself and the aforesaid documents are ordered to be taken on record as Annexures P-4 to P-7. Office to tag the same at appropriate place.

CWP-885-2005

1. The petitioner has approached this Court by invoking the extra-ordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a direction to the respondents to remove high power electric wire and electric pole from the plot in question and further to withdraw offer of possession and possession certificate dated 20.06.2002 (Annexure P-1). The petitioner has further prayed for issuance of a direction to the respondent to pay interest on the entire deposited amount from the date of the deposit till removal of the electric wires and poles from the said plot.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he had purchased SCO No. 38P, measuring 5.612x22 meters, i.e. 123.53 square meters for a sum of Rs.38,20,000/- from the Haryana Urban Development Authority-respondent No. 2 (for short 'the HUDA') in an open auction. After issuance of the allotment letter dated 01.12.2000, the petitioner deposited 25% price of the plot within 20 days. The paper possession was given to the petitioner on 20.06.2002 and certificate of possession (Annexure P-1) was issued. However, the petitioner found that high power electric wires and two electric poles were existing at the spot when he visited to take the possession. The petitioner requested Manohar Lal, Junior Engineer of office of the Estate Officer, HUDA (respondent No. 2) to remove the said electric poles but he was told that it is a lengthy procedure to remove these poles and electric wires, which will be done within 03 months. However, till the filing of the present petition, the said electric poles and wires were not removed and the petitioner could not start the construction of the plot despite the fact that he had purchased the plot for a sum of Rs.38,20,000/-. The petitioner had even made a representation dated 17.11.2004 (Annexure P-3) to grant him interest on the deposited amount but to no effect. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. Written statement was filed on behalf of respondent No. 2 whereby the allotment of the plot to the petitioner and other terms and conditions of the allotment letter were admitted. However, it was alleged that the possession of the commercial site was given to the petitioner on 20.06.2002 (Annexure P-1) by Manohar Lal, Junior Engineer and as per record of the respondents, there is no mention about a pole or any wire existing at the site. For the first time, the petitioner made a request on 18.11.2004 (Annexure P-3) and he remained silent from 20.06.2002 to 18.11.2004. In response to the representation of the petitioner, respondent No. 2 requested the concerned Executive Engineer, Electrical Division, HUDA, vide memo dated 02.12.2004 and subsequent memo dated 09.03.2005 to remove the said electric pole. The said pole was removed which has been intimated by the Executive Engineer, vide memo dated 14.03.2005. It was submitted that the petitioner for the reasons best known to him was not keen to construct the SCO and he wanted to avoid the payment of interest, as such, the petitioner is not entitled to any interest from the respondents, as prayed by him.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner could not construct the SCO despite the payment of the allotment price due to existence of electric wires and poles. He could not use the said property as such he is entitled for interest on the payment which he made to the respondents.

5. On the other hand, Sh. Himmat Singh, Advocate, for the respondents contented that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief as the pole was