(1.) Petitioner was the complainant before the District Forum, where he had filed a complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the respondent HUDA.
(2.) Undisputed facts of the case are that the petitioner purchased a booth in an open auction costing Rs. 7,12,000, consequent to which allotment letter was issued by the respondent HUDA on 28.3.1997, wherein complainant was asked to deposit 25% of the total price and the remaining 75% was to be paid in 8 half-yearly instalments failing which it was to carry interest. It was the case of the complainant that even though possession was given in March 1997, but it was only a paper possession, as the Sector was not developed. Since instalments were not coming in time, the respondent HUDA issued a notice in June 2000, demanding an amount of Rs. 2,51,775 towards payment of instalment, of enhanced compensation as also on account of payment of interest as per allotment letter. The complainant paid only Rs. 1,61,770, allegedly under protest. It was the case of the complainant that the sewerage was completed only in the year 2000, hence the respondents are not entitled to charge any interest for the period for which the petitioner/complainant could not start construction, for want of development providing basic amenities like sewerage in the area. It was in these circumstances, a complaint was filed before the District Forum alleging deficiency in service on the part of the respondent largely praying for quashing the amount of interest demanded by the respondent. The District Forum after hearing both the parties allowed the complaint. Aggrieved by this order, an appeal was filed before the State Commission by the respondent. State Commission allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the District Forum, hence this revision petition before us.
(3.) We heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record. We have gone through the allotment letter dated 28.3.97. Condition 6 of the allotment letter reads as under: