M P HOUSING BOARD Vs. D N BHUJBAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner - M.P. Housing Board against the order of M.P. State Commission directing the petitioner to refund Rs. 35,383/- with interest @ 12% till the date of payment and to execute registered sale deed with the respondent/complainant and cost of Rs. 500/-.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner allotted a house to the respondent/complainant vide order dated 12.9.1978 according to which, the cost of plot was Rs. 3,375/- and 20% of the cost of house was Rs. 6,000/-. The amount was paid by the respondent/complainant to the petitioner Board through the Co-operative Society through which the respondent/complainant got the house allotted to him. From time-to-time, respondent/complainant also paid an advance amount of Rs. 59,383/- between 14.3.1990 and 4.10.1992. When after making these payments, the petitioner Board did not execute sale deed agreement in favour of the respondent before us, the latter filed a complaint before the District Forum who after hearing both the parties and perusal of material on record, ordered refund of Rs. 35,383/- extension to sale deed and cost of Rs. 500/-. The basis of arriving at the figure of Rs. 35,383/- was that Rs. 6,000/- being 20% of the cost of house, the total cost of the house would work out to Rs. 30,000/- and since Rs. 6,000/- already stand paid earlier, balance due from the respondent/complainant would be Rs. 24,000/- against which, he has already paid Rs. 59,383/-, hence, after deducting Rs. 24,000/- from this amount, the balance amount was ordered to be refunded. The case of the petitioner before the District Forum and State Commission that the respondent/complainant is liable to pay interest/penal interest was not accepted as no material was produced to show the terms of payment including amount of each instalment, interest amount, due date for each instalments, etc. Petitioner's plea that the respondent/complainant was given the house on hire purchase and he was to pay the balance amount in 15 yearly instalments, was not accepted by the two lower Fora. This appears to be a serious lapses on the part of petitioner Board that allotment letter was issued in 1978 in which no detailed terms of payment were shown, Hire purchase agreement was executed according to the revision petition filed by the petitioner, in April, 1988 stipulating payment of cost of land in 15 yearly instalments commencing from 1.9.1978. This is a poor reflection on the working of petitioner Board.

(3.) There is no dispute about the amount deposited by the respondent/complainant and it is also not disputed that in the letter of allotment, there was no mention of instalment amount, due date, any interest/penal interest. We also see on record that the orders of District Forum and State Commission have already been complied with. On merits, we find no ground to interfere with the well reasoned orders of the District Forum and State Commission. This revision petition is dismissed with costs of Rs. 2000/- to be paid to the respondent/complainant. Revision Petition dismissed with costs.