RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD Vs. GYAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two revision petitions filed against the impugned order dated 16.09.2013, passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short 'the State Commission') in First Appeal No. 32 of 2013, "Rajasthan Housing Board versus Gyan Singh" and First Appeal No. 33 of 2013 "Rajasthan Housing Board Vs. Karuna Bohra", vide which, the said appeals filed against the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in consumer complaint No. 787 and 664 of 2012 were again dismissed, after the remand order passed by this Commission on 07.08.2013. This single order shall dispose of the two revision petitions and a copy of the same shall be placed on each file.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the complainants/respondents, Gyan Singh and Karuna Bohra submitted applications for booking flats in the scheme launched by the petitioner, Housing Board at Mewar Apartments, Haldi Ghati, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur by making payment of registration amount of Rs. 1,80,000/- each. The petitioners were successful in the draw of lots held on 14.4.2008 and allotment letters were issued to them. It has been alleged that despite making payment of the amounts demanded by the petitioner Board from time to time, there was delay in the issue of possession letter and further demands were raised before giving possession of the flats, which were also deposited. It was also alleged that the petitioner had not completed the construction work of the flats at the time of offer of possession and hence, shown negligence and deficiency in service. On the consumer complaint filed before the District Forum, it was ordered on 05.12.2012 that in complaint No. 787 of 2012 filed by the Gyan Singh, the Board shall pay interest @ 15% per annum on the amount of Rs.17.90 lacs from 30.03.2011 to 30.06.2011 and also refund the parking charges of Rs.97,225/- with interest @ 15% per annum from the date of receiving such payment till refund. The District Forum also ordered that interest of 10% per annum shall be paid for non-provision of amenities on the total amount of Rs.19,86,215/- and an amount of Rs.50,000/- shall be paid as compensation for mental agony and Rs.3,000/- as litigation expenses.

(3.) In the other consumer complaint filed by Karuna Bohra, it was ordered that the petitioner shall pay interest @ 9% per annum on the total amount of Rs.21.40 lacs from 30.03.2011 to 30.06.2011 and to refund parking charges of Rs.57,495/-, along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of receiving the amount till refund. It was also ordered that 10% interest shall be payable on the amount of Rs.23,38,784/- for not providing all amenities and Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and Rs.3,000/- as litigation expenses. Against this order of the District Forum, appeals were made before the State Commission, which were decided by them vide order dated 01.04.2013, upholding the order of the District Forum. The Revision Petition No.2284 of 2013 and Revision Petition No.2285 of 2013 were filed against the order of the State Commission which were decided by this Commission on 07.8.2013, and the matter was remanded to the State Commission for fresh decision, by passing a speaking order, giving specific reasons for agreeing or disagreeing with the findings of the District Forum. It was found that the order passed by the State Commission was vague and they had not analysed the facts and evidence on record. The State Commission have passed the impugned order dated 16.09.2013, in response to this order of the National Commission.