(1.) This first appeal has been filed by Delhi Development Authority (DDA), Appellants herein and Opposite Party before the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission) being aggrieved by the order of the State Commission which had allowed the complaint of Vas Dev, Respondent herein and Original Complainant before the State Commission.
(2.) FACTS:
(3.) Appellant on being served filed a written rejoinder stating that it was not possible to immediately allot the MIG flat to the Respondent, for which he was registered in 1979, because over a lakh of people had applied under the scheme and the construction of the flats was being done in stages. Respondent's Priority No. 26269 was quite low in the list of registrants. Thereafter he changed his mind and requested for allotment of a flat under SFS category. Respondent never paid the differential amount of Rs.11,326/- for changing his registration from MIG to SFS. Respondent's contention that he did not receive the letter dated 06.03.1990 because it was sent to a wrong address is not correct since the said letter was never returned undelivered by the postal authorities. Appellant also denied that they had misplaced the original file of the Respondent. In fact, even though Respondent did not deposit the amount of Rs.11,326/-, following his representations, his case was processed and he was given another chance to apply for allotment of SFS flat under the 8th SFS and it was mentioned in the telegram that the last date was 04.07.1995. However, when the date was extended to 29.07.1995, Respondent was again sent a letter on 14.07.1995 clearly stating this fact. Respondent did not apply for the SFS under the 8th SFS and requested for reverting his registration again from SFS to MIG which was declined as there was no such provision available under Appellant's Housing Schemes or under the terms and conditions of the allotment/brochure etc. Thus, there was no deficiency in service.