CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR PUDA Vs. SHABNAM VIRK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two revision petitions arise out of a common order passed by the State Commission in two appeals filed by both the petitioners, arising from a single order passed by the District Forum where the complainant, Ms. Shabnam Virk had filed a complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Chief Administrator, Punjab Urban Development Authority and anr.

(2.) Briefly the facts of the case are that the complainant was allotted a house on 27.3.1996 whose tentative cost was given out as Rs. 6.3 lakhs and tentative time for handing over the possession was given out as April, 1997. Possession of the house was offered and given in August, 1998 and the cost of the house was given as Rs. 7.44 lakhs. In these circumstances alleging deficiency on the part of PUDA, a complaint came to be filed before the District Forum who after hearing the parties decided not to interfere with the 'pricing' of the house being outside the jurisdiction of Consumer Forums, but held PUDA deficient in regard to delayed delivery of possession for which interest @ 12% p.a. was awarded for the deposited amount of Rs. 1,03,000/- for a period of one year and four months and cost of Rs. 1,100/-.

(3.) Aggrieved by this order both the parties filed appeals before the State Commission, while the appeal filed by PUDA was dismissed, appeal filed by the complainant was allowed directing PUDA to charge only the original price of Rs. 6.3 lakhs as also maintaining the order of the District Forum of grant of reliefs to the complainant - hence these two revision petitions before this Commission by both the parties.