RAMAN SHARMA Vs. CHANDIGARH HOUSING BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal against the order dated 9.1.2004 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum -II, U. T. , Chandigarh for short hereinafter to be referred as District Forum -II, in Complaint Case No.407 of 2001, Raman Sharma V/s. Chandigarh Housing Board.

(2.) THE case of the complainant is that he had applied for a flat under HIG (Lower) Housing Scheme, 1996 in Sector 38 (West), Chandigarh. As per provision of the scheme the flats were to be constructed and allotted on 70 per cent self -finance basis. This amount was to be paid as under: (i) Amount to be paid within 30 days from the date of issue of Acceptance and Demand Letter (ACD) -Rs.1,00,000/ -. (ii) First instalment within six months from the date of issue of ACD -Rs.1,00,000/ -. (iii) Second instalment within 12 months from the date of issue of ACD -Rs.1,00,000/ -. (iv) Third instalment within 18 months from the date of issue ACD -Rs.1,00,000/ -. (v) At the time of handing over of physical possession 70 per cent of the chargeable price minus the amount already paid. (vi) Balance of 30 per cent amount was to be paid in 60 equated monthly instalments with interest or if paid in lump sum within 30 days from the date of issue of allotment letter no interest was chargeable on this amount.

(3.) THE O. P. No.1 -Chandigarh Housing Board (C. H. B. , for short) had issued the ACD letter dated 29.1.1997. As per the complainant he made payment as per schedule. The total tentative price of the flat had been fixed at Rs.7 lakhs whereas he had paid Rs.4,40,000/ - to the O. P. No.1 up to 10.9.1998. This amount came to about 63 per cent of the tentative price. O. P. No.1 issued a letter of allotment of the complainant dated 10.1.2000 in respect of flat No.5763 (A), West of Sector 38, Chandigarh. The complainant avers that on taking possession of the flat he detected some deficiency in it and he pointed out these deficiencies to the higher authorities of C. H. B. and requested for their rectification. Some of the deficiencies were seepage into the wall of the flat, small holes in the chips flooring and one of the panel door was eaten into by the borer. As per the complainant a J. E. of the O. P. No.1 visited the house at his instance and some filling work was done in the floor but after 3 months the floor came back to its original condition with similar holes. The complainant avers that he had to spend Rs.2 lakhs in making the house worth living. He craved for compensation at the rate of Rs.20,000/ - for repairs done to the floor and at the rate of Rs.3,000/ - for the repairs done to the door. He has further alleged that he has been wrongfully charged interest amounting to Rs.6,364.65. The complainant had sought other reliefs as well in the complaint but he gave up those claims and finally prayed only for two reliefs as under: (a) Rs.23,000/ - as reimbursement on account of chips and cost of door panel. (b) Wrongfully charging of interest amounting to Rs.6,364.65.