HIMACHAL PRADESH HOUSING Vs. D.K. SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Himachal Pradesh Housing & Urban Development Authority (HIMUDA) has filed this revision petition against concurrent orders of the Consumer Disputes Redresssal Forum, Bilaspur District and the Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The complaint of Sri D.K. Sharma and another, seeking refund of excess price charged for the flat allotted to him has been allowed by both. As per the Complainant, the flat in Strawberry Hills, Phase-III Housing Colony constructed by the revision petitioner/HIMUDA, was allotted to him on 4.7.2003 at the price of Rs.11,48,000/-. Subsequently, in 2004 & 2005 flats of the same category in the same project were sold by HIMUDA to certain others, at a much lower rate of Rs.9,30,000/- . Having failed to get satisfactory response from HIMUDA, the Complainant filed a consumer complaint seeking refunds of difference between the two i.e. Rs. 2, 28,660, with 18% interest from the date of deposit together with compensation and costs. While allowing the complaint, the District Forum has observed: -

(2.) In the appeal filed by HIMUDA, the State Commission agreed with the conclusion reached by the District Forum and observed that:-

(3.) The revision petition now filed before this Commission on behalf of the HIMUDA primarily raises the same issue. We have heard Mr. Y. R. Prabhakara Rao, Advocate on behalf of the RP/ HIMUDA and have carefully perused the documents filed by him. The issue of limitation has again been raised by the revision petitioner. It is contended that the period should be computed from the date of allotment to the complainant. This argument has very rightly been rejected by the fora below. The cause of action arose only when similar flats were sold by HIMUDA to others at lower rates and not before. We therefore, have no hesitation in endorsing the view taken by the fora below on this point.