LAWS(NCD)-2017-5-81

RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD Vs. SATISH KUMAR BUDANIYA

Decided On May 15, 2017
RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD Appellant
V/S
Satish Kumar Budaniya Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present first Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioners against impugned order dated 13th May, 2016 passed by Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Jaipur (for short, 'the State Commission') in First Appeal No.1178 of 2015.

(2.) Brief facts are of the case as per Respondent/Complainant are that the Respondent/Complainant was allotted a House No.8/631 under 'Mukta Prasad Nagar Yojna, Bikaner' vide allotment letter dated 29.03.2010 and the last date of taking possession of the house was 28.06.2010. On 206.2010, after thorough inspection of the house, the Respondent decided not to take the house and requested the Petitioners to refund the deposited amount of Rs. 2,50,000.00. The main grievance of the Respondent against the Petitioners was that, even after repeated reminders sent by Respondent, the Petitioners have refunded only Rs. 2,38,000.00 on 13.10.2010, out of the total deposited amount of Rs. 2,50,000.00, by wrongly deducting 12,000.00 being 20% of the deposited amount, as per Rule No.9 of the 'Disposal of the Property Regulation 1970'. This was against law because these Regulations were not applicable to the Respondent. His case fell under Rule 1.15.4 of the 'Registration and Allotment of House, 1981', vide which the Petitioners can deduct only Rs. 2,500.00 from the deposited amount of the Respondent. Hence, the Respondent has filed a Consumer Complaint before the District Forum seeking directions to the Petitioners to pay the interest on the refunded amount Rs. 2,38,000.00 due to delay of three months and also to refund Rs. 12,000.00 along with interest, which was wrongly deducted from his deposited amount while as per rules only an amount of Rs. 2,500.00 could be deducted. Hence, balance amount of Rs. 9,500.00along with interest may be refunded to the Respondent and appropriate compensation amount may be also awarded in his favour.

(3.) Petitioners filed their written statement and denied all the allegations of the Respondent.