DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. MAHAVIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that Mahavir Singh, complainant for short, registered himself under 1979 HUDCO pattern scheme for L. I. G. category flat to be constructed by DDA. He was successful in the draw of lots dated 31.3.1982 and was allotted flat No.68-A, Pocketa2, Lawrence Road Delhi in April, 1983. He deposited Rs.17.000/- (this amount is Rs.13.600/- according to DDA) demanded by DDA. Letter of possession was issued on 2.9.1983. When the complainant went to receive possession on 21.9.1983, it was found that possession had already been delivered to one Swaran Singh. The DDA appears to have cancelled the allotment in favour of Swaran Singh who filed a Civil Suit which was ultimately decreed in his favour in July, 1991. The complainant kept on pressing the DDA for allotment of an alternative flat. On 16.11.1983 DDA wrote to the complainant that he was being allotted flat No.98a in Pocket A2, Lawrence Road on the original terms and condi- tions. In the letter it was further stated that formal Allotment-cum-Demand Letter would be issued shortly but the complainant wrote on 24.11.1983 that the offer of alternative flat was not acceptable to him for the reason that while the flat originally allotted, namely 68-A, had an open courtyard, there was no such open courtyard in the flat offered as an alternative, namely 98-A. He reiterated his request to allot the flat which was originally allotted to him or any other similar flat with an open courtyard. He also requested that the complainant may be considered for allotment of similar flat in South Delhi (Kalkaji etc. ). At one stage, the complainant requested that he may be allotted flat No.32-A, Pocket A-2, Lawrence Road. It was, however, found that the same had already been allotted to one Mahinder Kumar Sharma under the physically Handicapped category and possession had already been delivered. The case remained under process in a search for a similar flat in South Delhi but no such flat was available. It was in these circumstances that the complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum-II claiming allotment of flat similar to the originally allotted flat alongwith compensation amounting to Rs.1,00,000/-. The plea of DDA, opposite party before the District Forum was that the complainant was not a 'consumer'. It was further stated that on discovering the fact that the flat allotted to the complainant had been erroneously given to one Swaran Singh, the complainant was offered an alternative flat in the same locality on the original terms in November, 1983 itself. Ultimately Allotment Letter was not issued to the complainant as it was found that the complainant had failed to pay the amount due under the original allotment including interest for the period of delay.

(2.) On a consideration of the matter. District Forum-II held that complainant was a consumer. It was further held that the opposite party failed to deliver the possession of the flat on account of gross negligence and that the flat had already been allotted to another person. The plea that the allotment letter of the alternative flat was not issued as the complainant failed to deposit monthly instalments alongwith interest was rejected as untenable on the ground that the complainant could not be expected to go on with instalments when possession of the flat allotted to him had not been delivered. The Forum concluded "we have already taken the view in several other cases that in cases resulting from delay in allotment on the ground that the flat had already been allotted to someone else, the allottee is unable to get the alternative flat at the same price at which it was allotted to him originally or other persons of the same draw. The case of the complainant is similar to those cases. He was entitled to get an alternative flat at the same price and there was no question of any instalment having fallen due as possession of the flat originally allotted to him had not been given to him and the alternative flat had also not been allotted to him".

(3.) The complaint was allowed and DDA directed to deliver possession of the flat originally allotted to the complainant and in the event of its non-availablity to give the allottee an alternative flat in the same locality and at the same price at which the flat was originally allotted and also pay him a compensation of Rs.5.000/- within a period of 30 days from the date of the order. Aggrieved by the order DDA has preferred this appeal.