DINESH CHANDER GUPTA Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner being aggrieved of the dismissal of his appeal against the order of State Commission, has preferred this revision petition.

(2.) Brief facts giving rise to this revision petition are that petitioner filed a consumer complaint alleging that he applied for allotment of flat under New Pattern Registration Scheme launched by the opposite party and deposited Rs.1500/- as registration fee. It is the case of the complainant that after the registration, he did not get any communication about the fate of his application from the opposite party. In the beginning of 2007, petitioner came to know that a draw of lot under said scheme was earlier held by the opposite party. The petitioner thus checked the website of the opposite party and came to know that in a draw of lot, he was allotted flat no.55, Sector 20, Pocket 15, Rohini. The petitioner never got any intimation nor he was delivered the allotment letter. According to the petitioner, on coming to know about allotment of flat, he approached the office of the opposite party to get the allotment letter and even moved applications under RTI but the opposite party did not issue allotment letter. Being aggrieved, the petitioner raised a consumer dispute.

(3.) The opposite party in its written statement took a preliminary objection that complaint was barred by limitation. So far as booking of flat and deposit of registration fee is concerned, it is not disputed. According to the opposite party, after the draw of lot, letter was sent at the address of the complainant but complainant did not respond. Therefore, allotment was cancelled and flat was allotted to next eligible candidate in the waiting list.