DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016.

Case No.270/2008

Smt. Usha Sharma

D/o Late Sh. Khan Chand

W/o Sh. C. P. Chawala

Through General Power of Attorney

Sh. B. K. Chawala

R/o 8/14, West Patel Nagar,

(Lower Ground Floor)

New Delhi                                                                      ….Complainant

Versus

Delhi Development Authority

Through its Vice Chairman

INA, New Delhi                                                     ……Opposite Party

                                                          Date of Institution          : 25.04.08                                                           Date of Order        : 14.03.16

Coram:

Sh. N.K. Goel, President

Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member

O R D E R

 According to the Complainant, she got herself registered with the OP for getting dwelling residential accommodation under the scheme “6^th Self Financing Housing Registration Scheme, 1985, vide receipt No.002544 dated 22.06.1985 for Rs.15,000/-. As no reply was received from the OP, she sent letters dated 28.01.2008 & 07.03.2008 to the OP. She was paying heavy rent for the rented accommodation. She visited the OP several times but the officers of the OP gave false promises but she did not receive any allotment of the flat. Lastly, she met on 10.03.2008 with the officials of the OP but they did not give proper response. Hence, due to negligence of the OP, she did not get the allotment of the flat. Complainant has prayed that OP be directed to allot a residential flat as she has waited for 23 years for allotment of a flat or compensation amount to the tune of premium value as per the present market rate [Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs)] alongwith cost of the proceedings.

OP in the written statement has stated that the Complainant had made application for registration under the “Sixth Self Financing Housing Registration Scheme, 1985” and deposited a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards registration scheme. She has not filed the copy of the registration brochure on the basis of which she had got herself registered.  Release of the flats was to be made to the applicants time to time. The Complainant either did not apply for allotment of the flat or was not successful in release of the flat time to time and the Sixth Self Financing Housing has already been closed.  The public notice was given in the newspaper and the persons registered were advised to apply for refund.  According to OP, complainant is  entitled for refund of registration money and interest as per policy till 31.03.2002. OP has further stated that the Complainant has no case and the complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost.

Complainant has filed rejoinder to the written statement of OP.

Complainant has filed her own affidavit in evidence while affidavit of Sh. S. K. Jain, Director (H-I) has been filed in evidence on behalf of the OP.

Written arguments have been filed.

We heard the submissions on behalf of the parties and have also gone through the file very carefully.

Admittedly, the Complainant had made an application for allotment of a flat under the “Sixth Self Financing Housing Registration Scheme, 1985 with the OP and deposited a sum of Rs.15,000/- on 22.06.1985 vide receipt No.002544 (Copy annexure-A). The Complainant sent two letters dated 28.01.2008 & 07.03.2008 wherein she had requested the OP to inform the status of her application as well as the change of address (Copy Annexure B & C). The OP through an advertisement published in the newspaper Jan Satta on 01.05.1994 issued a notice to the public wherein it was informed that the person who had applied under 6^th Self Financing Housing Registration Scheme  can submit the  documents otherwise  they will not be  allowed to reapply  for allotment (Copy Ex. RW-1/1).

It transpires from the documents and the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties that the Complainant registered for the flat in 1985 but she did not enquire about the allotment of the flat till the year 2008 i.e. for about 13 years.  It appears that the Complainant  sent the letters to the OP before filing the complaint with a view to make out a case of deficiency in service against the OP.  According to the OP, the scheme has since been closed.  This fact has been mentioned in Ex. RW1/1.

This consumer forum constituted under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not established for the purpose of recovery. In other words, the complaint /suit for recovery of premium prevalent at the market rate cannot be filed before the consumer Forum. In order to file a complaint before the consumer forum the compliance of the condition stipulated in the Consumer Protection Act is a sine qua non. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the Complainant has failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of OP. Accordingly, we dismiss the complaint with no order as to costs.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations.  Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

Announced on 14.03.16.

(NAINA BAKSHI)                                                                                                                                                       (N.K. GOEL)  MEMBER                                                                                                                                                                       PRESIDENT 

Case No. 270/08

14.3.2016

Present –   None.

          Vide our separate order of even date pronounced, the complaint is dismissed.    Let the file be consigned to record room.

(NAINA BAKSHI)                                                                                                                                                  (N.K. GOEL)       MEMBER                                                                                                                                                                  PRESIDENT