TAMIL NADU HOUSING BOARD Vs. N R SRINIVASAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short point that arises for consideration in the appeal is whether there was deficiency in service on the part of the Housing Board in calling upon the complainant to pay certain amounts as condition precedent for executing sale deed in his favour.

(2.) ACCORDING to the complainant, he was the allottee. He made all payments and also took possession of the building. However, when it came to the execution of the sale deed in his favour, the Housing Board called upon him to pay additional amounts stating that what was originally fixed was only tentative cost and that unless the complainant paid the additional cost as decided by the Housing Board, the sale dead could not be executed. This, according to the complainant, amounted to deficiency in service.

(3.) ACCORDING to the opposite party Housing Board, the complainant had known even at the time the allotment letter was given that the cost was only tentative and that he was liable to pay the difference in cost after finalization of the final cost by taking into consideration the decision in L.A.O.P. cases. In the instant case, according to the opposite parties, the final cost was fixed after taking into consideration the decision by the Sub -Court, Nagapattinam made on 18.3.1997 in L.A.O.P. No. 39 of 1994 and on the basis of the decision by the Sub -Court, final cost was paid to ex -land owners of the enhanced award amount and only on that basis, final cost was fixed by the Housing Board in respect of the land where the building in question had come up. The complainant was also informed as also the other allottees even on 27.4.2000. But in spite of that the complainant had rushed to the Consumer Forum.