RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD & ANR Vs. GYAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioners against the order dated 23.9.2014 passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bench No. 1, Jaipur (in short, 'the State Commission') in Appeal No. 32/2013 Rajasthan Housing Board Vs. Gyan Singh by which, while dismissing appeal, order of District Forum allowing complaint was upheld.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that Complainant/respondent submitted application along with draft of Rs.1,80,000/- with OP/petitioner for allotment of flat in higher income group, 2nd category in Mewar Apartment, Haldi Ghati Marg, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur scheme. Approximate cost of the flat was Rs.17,90,000/-. In the draw, complainant was declared successful and OP issued allotment letter dated 22.10.2008 and in pursuance to allotment letter, complainant deposited total amount of Rs.17,90,000/- including interest on delayed payment. As per allotment letter, possession was to be given within a period of 30 months, but construction was not completed in 30 months. It was further submitted that possession letter was given to complainant on 30.6.2011 and by that letter OP demanded Rs. 1,96,215/- which was also deposited under protest, though, at the time of issuing letter, OP had not carried out work of electricity, road, park, parking, etc. It was further submitted that OP also demanded additional charge of Rs.97,225/- for parking, though, it was included in the construction cost of flat. Alleging deficiency on the part of OP, complainant filed complaint before District forum. OP resisted complaint and admitted issuance of allotment letter, possession letter and depositing amount by complainant. It was further submitted that delay of 2 months and 8 days was unavoidable, but as per terms of the booklet 6% interest has already been paid to the complainant. It was further submitted that in application booklet only estimated cost of flat has been mentioned and it was further mentioned that final cost of flat shall be ascertained later on and no dispute regarding it will be considered. It was further submitted that parking charges were taken as per Board's Cost Rule 2010. It was further submitted that other necessary facilities have been provided and prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District Forum after hearing both the parties allowed complaint and directed OP to pay interest @ 15% p.a. on Rs.17,90,000/- from 30.3.2011 to 30.6.2011 and further directed to refund Rs.97,225/- along with 15% p.a. interest and further directed to pay interest @ 10% p.a. on Rs.19,86,215/- from 30.6.2011 till providing all the facilities and further awarded compensation of Rs.50,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.3,000/-. Appeal filed by OP was dismissed by leaned State Commission against which, revision petition was filed before this Commission and this Commission vide order dated 7.8.2013 remanded back the matter to learned State Commission. Learned State Commission again vide order dated 16.9.2013 dismissed appeal. This Commission vide order dated 26.5.2014 again remanded matter back to learned State Commission and learned State Commission vide impugned order again dismissed appeal against which, this revision petition has been filed.

(3.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused record.