HARBANS SINGH Vs. RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has arisen out of the Order dated 7.9.94 of the Rajasthan State Commission at Jaipur partly modifying the order of the District Forum, Sri Ganga Nagar dated 3.12.92 and directing the Rajasthan Housing Board to refund to the complainant an amount of Rs. 17,000/-deposited by the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of 15% per annum besides Rs.8,000/-as compensation for mental distress and agony and Rs. 1,000/- as costs.

(2.) THE facts are not in dispute and may be noticed. The complainant got himself registered in the year 1984 with the Rajasthan Housing Board, opposite party for allotment of a house at Hanuman Garh Junction, District Sri Ganga Nagar by making a deposit of Rs. 5,000/- for registration. The Board vide its letter dated 27.1.87 required the complainant to deposit an amount of Rs. 12,000/-towards seed money. The complainant deposited first instalment of Rs. 6,000/- on 17.2.87 and second instalment of Rs. 6,000/- on 19.8.87 within the time stipulated by the Board. The complainant came to know that he was allotted house No. 8/384, Hanuman Garh Junction but neither the allotment letter was issued nor possession of the same was handed over to the complainant. The complainant alleged deficiency in service and after serving notice made a complaint before the District Forum, Sri Ganga Nagar. The version of the Board before the District Forum was that it had published a notice dated 13.2.87 in the newspaper intimating that houses have been allotted to all, the applicants who had applied for houses of Hunuman Garh and that despite publication of this notice the complainant did not make any application to the Board that no house had been allotted to him. It was however, admitted that amounts of the seed money have been credited in the records maintained by the Board and that the two instalments of Rs. 12,000/- had also been received.

(3.) THE Board filed an appeal before the Rajasthan State Commission at Jaipur. The State Commission affirmed the finding of fact recorded by the District Forum. It however, took the view that prior to the amendment in the Consumer Protection Act, on 18th of June, 1993 the District Forum had no power to grant the relief directing the allotment of house to the complainant. The State Commission modified the directions and directed that the complainant would get the refund of an amount of Rs. 17,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 15% per annum w.e.f. 13.2.91 till payment besides an amount of Rs. 8,000/- as compensation for mental distress and agony and Rs. 1,000/- as costs. The matter came up for hearing before this Commission on 31st October, 1995 and again on 1st December, 1995. The matter was adjourned to enable the Counsel for the Board to seek instructions from his client as to whether any house was available for allotment to the complainant in case this Commission takes the view that the relief of allotment of a house could be granted. The matter was finally heard on 3rd of January, 1996. It is true that an amendment in Section 14(1) was made by Act 50 of 1993 with effect from 18th June, 1993 and the complaint in this case was filed on 18.9.1991 and the District Forum passed the order on 3rd of December, 1992. According to Section 14 of the Act as it then stood, the District Forum could only award compensation to the complainant and could not direct the allotment of a house. The fact remains that on 18th of June, 1993 the appeal was pending before the State Commission. The first appeal is the continuation of the main complaint and all reliefs which were available on the date of the determination of the appeal could be granted to the complainant. The refund of the amount deposited by the complainant for allotment of a house could in no way compensate the complainant who has been awaiting the allotment and possession of the house right from 1988. In fact House No. 8/384 was allotted to the complainant. During the course of hearing on 3.1.96 the Counsel for the Board informed us that one of the House Nos. from 58 to 72 in Block No. 8, Hanuman Garh is available for allotment to the complainant in case this Commission directs.