DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. SANDEEP GANDOTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Appeal, under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been filed by the Appellant against the order dated 16.04.2013 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the State Commission) in CC/230/2007.

(2.) Case of the Complainant/Respondent is that he was registered with the Appellant under its Vth Self Financing Scheme for allotment of a Category III Flat. The Complainant paid the Appellant Rs.15,000/- as registration fees and accordingly, the Appellant allotted a flat in his name in Mukherjee Nagar at an estimated cost of Rs.7,81,200/-, vide Allotment Letter dated 15.03.1994. According to the Complainant, the Allotment Letter was incomplete, as the list of approved financial institutions from where loan could be obtained for payment towards the flat, was not provided. In the absence of the list of approved financial institutions, he could not avail a loan for payment of 90% of the demand towards the flat allotted to him. He sought for the same from the DDA, vide letter dated 15.04.1994, but the same was not sent. Subsequently, vide letter dated 11.09.1996, the Appellant informed the Respondent that his allotment was cancelled due to non-payment of demanded instalments. Thereafter, in the year 1997, the father of the Respondent met the Principal Commissioner of the Appellant and showed a letter of a broker of Vasant Kunj regarding allotment of Category III SFS Flat bearing No. 3115 Pocket B-4, Vasant Kunj, following which the Appellant placed the matter before a Restoration Committee. The Restoration Committee meeting was held and it was decided by the Appellant that the Respondent would be considered for allotment of a Category III SFS flat in Vasant Kunj. Accordingly, on 24.12.1999, in a computerized draw the Complainant was allotted a Category III SFS Flat and informed, vide letter dated 28.12.1999, that he had been allotted flat No. 4066, Pocket 5 & 6, Sector B, Vasant Kunj. On receipt of the said letter dated 28.12.1999, the Respondent made representations to the Appellant stating that he had been wronged by the Appellant and lost his earlier allotment and therefore, the new allotment should be made to him at the old cost. The Appellant, however, informed the Complainant, vide letter dated 03.03.2000, that the new allotment would be made at the current cost prevailing at that time. Despite his protests, he received a demand letter dated 14.08.2000 from the Appellant in which the cost of the newly allotted flat was stated to be Rs.19,41,400/-, which was the cost prevailing in the year 2000. Thereafter a series of correspondence was exchanged between the Parties regarding the cost and eventually, the Appellant, vide letter dated 17.04.2003, informed the Respondent that the allotment of the Flat bearing No. 4066, Pocket 5 & 6, Sector B, Vasant Kunj stood cancelled. The Respondent, left with no other option, filed a Complaint in the State Commission with the following prayer:-

(3.) The Complaint was contested by the Appellant-Opposite Party who denied the allegations. The Appellant denied that incomplete allocation letter was issued in respect of Mukhrjee Nagar flat. The Appellant justified the cancellation of allotment, due to non-payment of the requisite instalments and therefore, the demand-cum-allotment letter for the new allotment was issued at the prevailing cost. It was further stated that the new allotment was also cancelled as no payment was made by the Respondent.