RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD Vs. NARESH CHAND GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision Petition, under Sec. 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to the Act), has been filed by Rajasthan Housing Board and its Resident Engineer at Bhiwadi, Alwar, Rajasthan, Opposite Parties in the Complaint under the Act (hereinafter referred to as the Petitioners), against the Order dtd. 1/6/2016, passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission) in First Appeals No. 454 and 270 of 2015. While First Appeal No.454 of 2015 had been preferred by the Complainant/Respondent herein, First Appeal No. 270 of 2015 had been preferred by the Petitioners herein, against the Order dtd. 28/1/2015, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jaipur 2nd (hereinafter referred to as the District Commission) in Consumer Complaint 650 of 2009, preferred by the Complainant/Respondent herein.

(2.) By its Order dtd. 28/1/2015, the District Commission had accepted the Complaint, preferred by the Complainant/Respondent herein, and directed the Petitioners herein to issue fresh demand notice within one month from the said date, after levying interest @ 12% per annum on the delayed payment and the Complainant/Respondent was directed to make the said payment within one month from the date of the said demand notice, where-after the Petitioners herein were directed to handover possession of House No. 4/21 to the Complainant/Respondent, after carrying necessary repairs, within one month from the date of making the said payment. Further, it was also directed by the District Commission that if the Complainant/Respondent fails to deposit the aforesaid amount, then allotment made in his favour shall be treated as cancelled after expiry of one month and in such a situation the amount already deposited by him shall be refunded by the Petitioners with 6% interest per annum. However, by the Impugned Order, the State Commission dismissed the Appeal, preferred by the Petitioners, and allowed the Appeal, preferred by the Complainant/Respondent, directing the Petitioners herein to raise the demand only after levying interest @ 6%. Rest of the Order passed by the District Commission was confirmed.

(3.) Briefly stated, the facts of the Case are that in the year 1982 the Complainant/Respondent had applied for allotment of a house under MIG-B Category in the Residential Scheme, proposed to be built/developed by the Petitioners at Bhiwadi, and had also deposited a sum of Rs.4600.00 in this behalf on 30/12/1982. However, the Petitioners did not allot any house to the Complainant/Respondent whereas other similar Applicants were allotted house in the said Category in the year 1985. Thereafter, in the year 1987 a house was allotted to the Complainant/Respondent at Alwar instead of Bhiwadi and, upon objection being made, the mistake was rectified by the Petitioners, by including his name in the list of Bhiwadi and giving him the priority of 1987 instead of 1982. Thereafter, as demanded by the Petitioners, the Complainant/Respondent paid the installment. It was informed to the Complainant/Respondent in the year 1999 that no house was available in MIG-B Category. Then, the Complainant/Respondent applied for change of Category from MIG-B to HIG and on 30/6/1999 he was allotted house No. 4/21 in HIG Category in Housing Colony, Bhiwadi and was asked to deposit Rs.9,17,115.35. The Complainant/Respondent objected as regards cost of the house by filing Consumer Complaint No. 298 of 2006 and First Appeal No.857 of 2007 but the same were dismissed by the District Commission and the State Commission vide Orders dtd. 27/2/2007 and 29/6/2007 respectively.