DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, LUCKNOW
CASE No.505 of 2014
Km. Richa Bajpai, aged about 38 yrs.,
D/o Sri Suresh Narain Bajpai,
R/o B-1132, Indira Nagar,
Lucknow.
……Complainant
Versus
1. UP Awas Vikas Parishad,
104, M.G. Marg, Lucknow.
Through Housing Commissioner.
2. Housing Commissioner,
UP Awas Vikas Parishad,
104, M.G. Marg, Lucknow.
.......Opp. Parties
Present:-
Sri Vijai Varma, President.
Smt. Anju Awasthy, Member.
JUDGMENT
This complaint has been filed by the Complainant against the OPs for amount of Rs.7,500.00 standing unpaid, payment of 18% interest on Rs.7,500.00, compensation of Rs.10,000.00 and cost of the complaint.
The case in brief of the Complainant is a permanent disabled person with deficiency of speech and hearing both. The OP No.1 by means of opening of a registration for the allotment of EWS Basera-1 Type Houses (G+3) 4 storey opened the registration w.e.f. 08.02.2013 to 15.03.2013 by inviting applications for the purposes of allotment of a EWS house in Awadh Vihar Scheme at Sultanpur Road, Lucknow. The Complainant applied in the aforesaid registration and submitted the concerned application form on 28.03.2013 with the OP No.1. Under the provision of registration booklet fee of Rs.7,500.00 was shown as registration amount for the reserved category of people. It is to state that disabled persons have
-2-
been shown as reserved category people as per page No.22 of the aforesaid registration booklet. The Complainant deposited the form alongwith the registration amount through DD dated 28.03.2013 amounting to Rs.7,500.00. On the perusal of the submitted application as published by internet, the OP No.1 shown the name of the Complainant at S.No.6324 with a remark of less registration. The Complainant wrote to concerned Assistant Housing Commissioner of OP No.1 office by application dated 02.09.2013 as to why an objection of less registration has been indicated in spite of the fact that the entire demanded amount of Rs.7,500.00 has already been paid. Afterwards the Housing Commissioner by means of a publication in newspaper informed the general people that there was some confusion in the booklet in the registration amount and further clarified that Rs.7,500.00 was the registration amount for SC/ST/OBC category of people and for the rest of the reserved category the registration amount was Rs.15,000.00 as for general category of people. In pursuance to above publication the Complainant by means of her application dated 15.09.2013 deposited another DD dated 14.09.2013 amounting to Rs.7,500.00. As per policy of the OP No.1 office, the eligibility draw of the successful candidate was made in the office of OPs and the amount of unsuccessful candidate was refunded by OP No.1 in respective bank accounts of unsuccessful candidates. The Complainant was surprised to know through her passbook that only a part amount of Rs.7,500.00 has been refunded in the concerned account of Complainant of Vijaya Bank on 19.03.2014 without refunding the entire amount of Rs.15,000.00 as was accepted by the OP No.1 and 2. The Complainant by means of a notice/letter dated 22.04.2014 informed the entire case to the OP No.2 to look into the matter and get the balance amount refunded through neft with a prayer to take an action against the erring officer but the OP No.2 has kept silent on the complaint which is deficiency of service, hence this complaint.
-3-
The OPs have filed the WS wherein it is mainly submitted that it is clearly mentioned in brochure that amount will be refunded to the unsuccessful registered candidates and an amount of Rs.7,500.00 was refunded to the Complainant on 19.03.2014. The Complainant himself paid less registration amount and he deposited DD of balance amount in the office of the OPs which was thereafter presented to the Bank, hence only an amount of Rs.7,500.00 was being shown in the account of the Complainant which was returned to the Complainant by the bank but some mistake was found in the aforesaid draft of the Complainant and amount of Rs.7,500.00 through cheque No.063111 was returned back to the Complainant by registered post on 20.10.2014 which was received by the Complainant. The Complainant is not entitled to any interest and any amount from the OPs. No allotment is made to the Complainant and the Complainant is not the consumer and he is not entitled to any compensation from the OPs. Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble NCDRC have held that a person who has done any registration, does not come within the definition of the consumer, hence this complaint is not maintainable in this Forum and this complaint deserves to be dismissed with costs.
The Complainant has filed her affidavit with 1 annexure and 9 annexures with the complaint. The OPs have filed the affidavit of Dr. Anil Kumar, Deputy Housing Commissioner, UP Awas and Vikas Parishad.
Heard Counsel for the parties and perused the entire record.
This is a simple case where the Complainant applied for allotment of a house be depositing Rs.7,500.00 on 28.03.2013 and thereafter another sum of Rs.7,500.00 was deposited by her as the registration amount on 14.09.2013 as she was not categorised as the reserved category of SC/ST/OBC when there was a draw of allotment of house to the candidates, then
-4-
those who were not successful in the draw were refunded back the amount deposited by them as registration fee. The Complainant was not successful in the draw but she was refunded only a sum of Rs.7,500.00 and when she asked the OPs to refund the balance amount of Rs.7,500.00 also to her then no action was taken. The OPs have taken the stand that since Rs.7,500.00was first deposited by the Complainant on 19.03.2014 and the rest of amount of Rs.7,500.00 was deposited by her subsequently and as at the time of refunding of the amount to the unsuccessful candidates, only Rs.7,500.00 was being shown in the accounts of the Complainant, therefore that amount was refunded to her on 19.03.2014. But subsequently on checking the account of the Complainant, it was found that Rs.7,500.00 was later on deposited by her, hence this balance amount of Rs.7,500.00 was also sent to her through cheque to the Complainant by registered post on 20.10.2014. Thus, the OPs come with the justification for not refunding the balance amount of Rs.7,500.00 to the Complainant on the ground that this amount was not being shown in the accounts at the time of refunding of the first deposit of Rs.7,500.00, therefore it could not be refunded to her and as soon as it came to their knowledge that the Complainant had also deposited Rs.7,500.00 subsequently, then this amount of Rs.7,500.00 was also refunded to her, therefore there is no deficiency on their part. The OPs have taken one objection that the Complainant is not a consumer as no allotment was made in favour of the Complainant and therefore this complaint deserves to be dismissed on this score itself. We find that there is no substance in the argument advanced from the side of the OPs that the Complainant is not a consumer as no registration was done in his favour because the amount of Rs.7,500.00 was not paid by the OPs without any justification to the Complainant and therefore the Complainant had had the cause of action against the OPs and
-5-
that the Complainant had a consumer dispute with the OPs and he was definitely a consumer viz.-a-viz. the OPs.
Now, we come to the main point as to whether the OPs have committed deficiency in service in not refunding Rs.7,500.00 to the Complainant. In this regard, the justification given by the OPs that the subsequent deposit of Rs.7,500.00 of the Complainant was not showing in the accounts of the Complainant, therefore at the time of refunding of the amount only Rs.7,500.00 was refunded to the Complainant and it is only subsequently that they could find out that the Complainant had deposited Rs.7,500.00 twice and therefore Rs.7,500.00 was remaining as balance to be paid by the OPs, therefore the OPs paid Rs.7,500.00 by cheque to the Complainant. But it is interesting to note that this complaint was filed on 16.09.2014 and the OPs were issued notices on19.09.2014 and it is only thereafter that the OPs have made payment of Rs.7,500.00 through cheque on 20.10.2014. The justification given by the OPs is fully unjustified as when the Complainant had deposited Rs.7,500.00 twice amounting to Rs.15,000.00 with the OPs then there was no question of the OPs to refund only a sum of Rs.7,500.00. If the balance amount of Rs.7,500.00 was not shown in the account of the Complainant then it is the fault of the OPs and therefore there is certainly deficiency in service on the part of the OPs in not refunding the balance amount of Rs.7,500.00 in the right earnest, therefore the Complainant is entitled to get interest on the amount of Rs.7,500.00 from the date of refund of the first amount of Rs.7,500.00 on 19.03.2014 till 20.10.2014. As the Complainant has also been harassed in this case, therefore she is also entitled to compensation as also cost of the litigation.
ORDER
The complaint is partly allowed. The OPs are jointly and severally directed to pay 9% per annum interest on the amount of Rs.7,500.00 from 19.03.2014 to 20.10.2014 to the Complainant.
-6-
The OPs are also directed to pay Rs.2,000.00 (Rupees Two Thousand Only) as compensation and Rs.2,000.00 (Rupees Two Thousand Only) as cost of the litigation. The compliance of the order is to be made within a month. If the compliance of the order is not made within a month then OPs will pay 9% interest on the entire amount due.
(Anju Awasthy) (Vijai Varma)
Member President
Dated: 3 September, 2015
