STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/6/A/90/2023 HSVP PRESENT ADDRESS - GURUGRAM ,HARYANA.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus DAYA CHAND GUPTA PRESENT ADDRESS - H.NO. 24, SECTOR 15, PART-I, ,HARYANA.

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

T P S MANN , PRESIDENT FOR THE APPELLANT:

SHRISIKANDER BAKSHI, COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANTS.

FOR THE RESPONDENT:

SHRIABHIMANYU BATRA, COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT ALONGWITHSHRI DAYA CHAND GUPTA-COMPLAINANT-RESPONDENT IN PERSON DATED: 26/05/2025

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA First Appeal No.90 of 2023 Date of Filing:31.01.2023 Date of Order:26.05.2025

1. Estate Officer-I, Haryana Urban Development Authority, Now Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran, Gurugram/Pataudi, Haryana.

2. HUDA, now HSVP, through Administrator, Gurgugram.

3. The Chief Administrator, HSVP, Panchkula, C-3, Sector-6, Panchkula.

…..Appellants Versus Daya Chand Gupta, Advocate S/o Shri Tara Chand Gupta, R/o House No.24, Sector-15, Part-I, Gurugram.

..…Respondent CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice T.P.S Mann, President.

Present:- ShriSikander Bakshi, counsel for the appellants.

ShriAbhimanyu Batra, counsel for the respondent alongwithShri Daya Chand Gupta-complainant-respondent in person.

O R D E R

T.P.S. MANN J.

Appellants-Opposite Parties-HSVP has filed the instant appeal under Section

41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 for challenging the order dated 22.06.2022 passed by learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gurgaon whereby complaint filed by him (Daya Chand Gupta) was allowed with directions:-

“Thus, after considering all the facts and circumstances of the present case, we impose a penalty of Rs.2,00,000/- on the OPs and direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.4,01,193/- along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of deposit till its realization, to pay interest @ 9% on the amount of Rs.17,34,666/- which was deposited by the complainant from 10.03.2014 onwards and not to charge Rs.51,750/- which they were claiming as extension fee. The complainant is also entitled to compensation for harassment and mental agony in respect of which a penalty of Rs.2,00,000/- has already been imposed upon the OPs to be paid to the complainant. The complainant is also entitled to compensation for litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.11,000/-.”

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 10.02.2011, residential plot No.6GP category residential measuring 1 Kanal in Sector-2 Pataudi at Urban Estate Pataudi on free hold basis was allotted to Manish Hora vide memo No.Z- 0002/E0004/UEE30/GALOT/0000000027 dated 10.02.2011. The total cost of the plot was Rs.46,25,775/- of size 450 sq. mtrs. @ Rs.9790/- per square meter. On 28.01.2011, 09.03.2011 and 02.07.2013, allottee deposited Rs.4,40,600/-, Rs.7,15,844/- and 12,95,000/- respectively. Out of this amount, the OPs adjusted Rs.11,40,543/- as principal amount and Rs.1,54,457/- as delayed interest. Thereafter, on 10.03.2014, the allottee also deposited Rs.6,19,000/- and out of this, the OPs adjusted Rs.5,94,123/- as principal amount and Rs.8293/- as delayed interest. Thereafter, vide memo dated 09.04.2014/02.05.2014, the aforesaid plot was allotted to the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant deposited Rs.7,86,382/- on 29.12.2014, Rs.7,16,995/- on 28.12.2015, Rs.6,28,774/- on 28.12.2016 as demanded by the OPs. The OPs did not complete the development work such as sewer and erection of electric poles etc. The OPs without doing any development work, offered the possession of the plot on 20.01.2014, which was illegal, unjust and improper. The paper work has been done by the opposite parties in order to extract money and cheat the complainant by charging interest and extension compounding fee. The complainant moved an application under section 6 of The Right to Information Act to the Estate Officer, HUDA Gurugram on 25.06.2019, which was duly replied and stated that “electric work has yet not been completed due to non-connectivity of Sector Road u