NAND LAL KHOSLA Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal, filed by the appellant, under Sec.15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is directed against order dated 8.9.1999, passed by District Forum No. II in Complaint Case No.2236/1995 - entitled Sh. Nand Lal Khosla V/s. Delhi Development Authority and Anr.

(2.) The facts, relevant for the disposal of the present appeal, briefly stated, are that the appellant had filed a complaint under Sec.12 of the Act before the District Forum, averring that the brother of the appellant, by name Sh. Ashok Khosla got himself registered with the respondent/dda for allotment of a MIG flat on hire purchase basis and on the death of his brother the above said registration was transferred in the name of his mother Smt. Vidhyawati Khosla. It was stated in the complaint by the appellant that the respondent/dda issued an allotment letter on 13.7.1984 and in compliance of the directions of respondent/dda said Smt. Vidhyawati Khosla deposited a sum of Rs.50,942/- with the respondent/dda on 24.8.1993. It was averred that the balance amount towards the cost of the flat was to be paid in 84 monthly instalments. Said Smt. Vidhyawati Khosla expired on 23.1.1990 and by virtue of a Will left by her, the rights in the flat were transferred in the name of the appellant on 7.11.1991. It was stated in the complaint that as the possession of the flat was not given by the respondent/dda and the respondent/dda had raised a further demand of Rs.1,70,307/-, the appellant filed a complaint in this Commission and this Commission passed orders on 20.8.1993 in Complaint Case No. C-19/1992. The Commission in the above said case, as per the case of the appellant, directed that the possession of the flat be delivered to the appellant besides interest on the amount deposited by the appellant with the respondent/dda. The possession of the flat in question was delivered on 28.12.1994. It was stated in the complaint by the appellant that earlier the possession of flat No.28-A, which was allotted to the predecessor-in-interest of the appellant, was given to one Sh. J. N. Yadav whose flat, bearing No.67-A, Pkt. A-10, in Kalkaji Extn. Area had developed major cracks in the year 1988. It was further stated that after the decision of this Commission, the above said flat bearing No.28-A in Pkt. A-10, Kalkaji Extn. was got vacated and the possession was handed over to the appellant on 28.12.1994.

(3.) It was averred that after taking the possession of the flat the appellant contacted the M. C. D. for water connection and the M. C. D. raised a Bill for Rs.511/- on account of arrears of water tax and a Bill for Rs.30,468/- on account of House tax. It was alleged in the complaint by the appellant that the appellant was not liable to pay the above said amount to the M. C. D. However, the appellant paid the arrears of water charges amounting to Rs.511/- in order to obtain water connection. In the complaint, filed by the appellant, before the District Forum the appellant had prayed for the grant of following reliefs : (a) to direct respondent No.1 to pay to the complainant Rs.511/- as compensation against unpaid water charges relating to period prior to the date of delivery of possession of the flat to the complainant, which he was forced to pay to get water supply/connection for his flat; (b) to direct respondent No.1 to pay to the complainant, a sum of Rs.30,000/- being equivalent to six months' rental value of the flat during which period the complainant remained unable to occupy the flat; (c) to direct respondent No.1 to pay to the complainant, a sum of Rs.30,460/- in respect of pre-existing house tax liability relating to the period prior to 28.12.1994; (d) to direct respondent No.1 to pay to the complainant Rs.10,000/- as compensation against physical hardship and mental harassment suffered by the complainant; (e) to grant costs of this litigation; or (f) to pass any other order which may be just, fit and proper in the circumstances of this case.