RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD Vs. KHUSHAL MEGHWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are applications seeking impleadment of the legal representatives of the deceased respondent namely Champalal Pareek. The Learned Counsel appearing for the proposed legal representatives of the deceased respondent/complainant submits that the deceased was survived by his widow, one son and one daughter. He further submits that one son of the deceased had expired in his life-time and the pre-deceased son of the deceased respondent is survived by three class-I legal heirs, namely Smt. Jamna Devi, Sh. Abhishek and Sh. Bharat. Hence, Smt. Bhagwati Devi(widow of deceased respondent), Smt. Jamna Devi (widow of pre-deceased son of deceased respondent) , Sh. Abhishek, Sh. Bharat, (sons of pre-deceased son of deceased respondent) Sh. Ajay Pareek (son of deceased respondent) and Smt. Indu Bala (daughter of deceased respondent) are brought on record as the legal representatives of the deceased respondent. The amended memo. Of parties filed by the proposed legal representatives of the deceased is taken on record. The applications stand disposed of. RPs 21, 22, 23, 24 & 25 of 2017.

(2.) The Complaints were resisted by the petitioner Board which inter alia stated in its written version that it proposed to construct 144 multi-storied flats in phase-I under Marwar Apartment Housing Project, for which registrations were made in the years 2008, 2009 and 2010. The construction commenced in October, 2009 and was completed in March, 2013. It was also stated in the Written Version that the cost given in the reservation letter was only an estimated cost and the allotment was made on no-profit-no-loss basis, the final cost having been calculated after the construction work had finished. The other charges demanded in the allotment letter were also sought to be justified by the petitioner Board.

(3.) The District Forum having dismissed the Consumer Complaint, the complainants/respondents approached the concerned State Commission by way of separate appeals. The State Commission having allowed the appeals and having directed refund of the amount which the complainants had deposited with the petitioner Board, along with interest @ 9% p.a., the petitioner Board is before this Commission, by way of these Revision Petitions.