K D KOTHIYAL Vs. PHOOL KAUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant against order dated 21.12.2011 passed by the U.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lucknow (in short, 'the State Commission') in Consumer Complaint No. 38/2007 Smt. Phoola Kaul Vs. Annuradha Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd. by which, while allowing complaint, President of OP No. 1 was directed to execute sale deed of Flat No. D-902 in favour of the complainant and give possession of the flat.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that complainant/Respondent No. 1 became member of OP No. 1/Respondent No.2 and deposited Rs.3,00,000/- on 17.1.2001. Complainant booked flat with OP No. 1 and later on paid Rs.1,25,000/- on 17.4.2001 and subsequently made some more payment totalling Rs.7,75,000/-. It was further alleged that OP No. 1 never informed complainant about meeting held by OP No. 1 and committed various irregularities. By draw of lots, complainant was allotted Flat No. D-902 on 15.2.2003, but as flat was on 9th floor, complainant by letter dated 27.2.2004 informed OP No. 1 to allot flat on lower floors and also requested that flat allotted to him may be transferred to some other person and fund may be returned to him for purchase of another flat in close vicinity. It was further alleged that from Mr. M.L. Dhullu who is also member of OP No. 1 came to know that General Body Meeting on 3.10.2004 allotted Flat No. D-902 to one Mr. K.D. Kothiyal without following proper procedure. On 11.10.2004, complainant asked OP No. 1 to give him possession of the allotted flat. Complainant never resigned as member and only requested for change of floor. Complainant again vide letter dated 31.12.2004 asked for remaining outstanding payment and President of OP No.1 by letter dated 24.1.2005 apprised that Rs.2,41,700/- balance was payable for Flat No. D-902. Possession of flat was not given to him. Alleging deficiency on the part of OP, complainant filed complaint before State Commission for getting possession of the flat and for execution of documents in favour of the complainant. OP No. 1 and 2 resisted complaint and admitted allotment of Flat No. D-902 to the complainant, but submitted that complainant by letter dated 27.9.2004 requested to transfer this flat in some other person's name and accordingly flat has been allotted to Mr. K.D. Kothiyal to whom possession has been given after receiving consideration and prayed for dismissal of complaint.

(3.) Respondent No. 2 filed reply to appeal, but later on did not appear and he was proceeded ex-parte. Presence of Respondent No. 3 & 4 was dispensed with as no order was passed against them by State Commission.