Haryana

Karnal

CC/19/2020

Manoj Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Housing Board Haryana - Opp.Party(s)

Balwan Singh

07 Jan 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL  COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                         Complaint No. 19 of 2020

                                                          Date of instt.10.01.2020

                                                          Date of Decision 07.01.2022

 

Manoj Kumar aged 34 years son of Shri Hari Chand, resident of House no.275, ward no.1, Katju Nagar, Taraori, District Karnal.

 

                                                 …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

1.     Housing Board Haryana, plot no.743-A, Sector-04, Karnal, through its Estate Manager, Karnal.

 

2.     Housing Board Haryana, plot no.C-15, Awas Bhawan Sector-06, Panchkula, through its Chief Revenue Officer/Chief Administrator.

 

                                                                      …..Opposite Parties.

 

Complaint Under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.       

      Sh. Vineet Kaushik…….Member

              Dr.Rekha Chaudhary…..Member

 

 Argued by: Shri Balwan Singh, counsel for complainant.

                    Shri Partap Singh Saini, counsel for OPs.

 

                    (Jaswant Singh President)

ORDER:   

                

                        The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as after amendment Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) on the averments that complainant had applied for the allotment of residential BPL flat under Karnal 10215 BPL Scheme launched by the OPs, vide application no.42536 dated 20.08.2013 by depositing an amount of Rs.44,000/- in the office of OPs. The complainant was successful for the allotment of BPL flat, vide Provisional Registration no.KNL/BPL/HBH/1268 and Final registration no.74 and then on demand of the OPs, the complainant had further deposited Rs.44,000/- in the office of the OPs, vide draft no.024766 dated 13.08.2014 and accordingly the complainant in total had deposited Rs.88,000/-. The father of complainant had suffered acute pain in his heart and since then his father had stopped for earning and had taken outdoor treatment. So, all the responsibilities of the family came on the shoulders of the complainant. Due to such responsibilities of family, on 31.10.2017 complainant moved an application before the OP no.1 for cancellation of said BPL flat with a request for the refund of the aforesaid money deposited by him i.e.Rs.88000/- in the office of OPs, as the complainant was in urgent need of money. The said application was duly accepted by the OP no.1 and had given an assurance that very soon the aforesaid amount will be refunded to the complainant. After that, complainant received an allotment letter from the office of OPs that had also been returned by the complainant in the office of OP no.1 on 19.01.2018 with a written letter by explaining that the complainant had already cancelled the said BPL flat. On the visit, the officials of the OP no.1 had intimated the complainant that the cancellation of BPL flat had been approved and a letter bearing no.HBH/(EM)2018/170 dated 08.01.2018 had been sent by the office of the OP no.1 to the office of OP no.2 for refund the amount of Rs.83,600/- (after deduction of 10% amount of Registration amount) in favour of the complainant and orally assured that now OP no.2 would send a cheque regarding aforesaid refundable amount of Rs.83,600/- to the complainant directly. After waiting sufficiently when complainant had not received the cheque, then complainant visited the office of OP no.1 for enquiring the status of refundable money, but every time the OP no.1 did not give any satisfactory response and ultimately in the first week of September, 2019, the OP no.1 refused to do anything in the matter by saying that the aforesaid amount will be refunded by the OP no.2, as per instruction of OP no.1 complainant made his visit in the office of the OP no.2. Thereafter, the officials of the OP no.1 used rude language and asked the complainant not to come again in the office for enquiring the status of the refundable amount.

2.             Further, having no alternate on 10.09.2019 complainant personally approached to the office of OP no.2 with a written request letter for the refund of money deposited by him and at the same time the complainant had also explained all the family problems and humbly requested to refund the aforesaid amount of Rs.83,600/- but OP no.2 also refused to refund the money to the complainant and made remarks on the written request letter of the complainant as “flats are already constructed, refund cannot be issued out of seniority list”. Thereafter, complainant moved a complaint before CM Window, Karnal vide complaint no.CMOFF/M/2019/117955 dated 30.09.2019 with a request for refund of said amount of Rs.83,600/- which has also been disposed off in view of Action Taken Report no.7620 dated 06.12.2019 and the OP no.2 has uploaded a letter bearing no.HBH/CRO(PM)/2019/7621 dated 06.12.2019 on CM Portal vide which the OP no.2 has held that:-

        “This is with reference to your cited complaint regarding refund against final Registration no.74, in respect of Karnal 10215 BPL Scheme. In this regard, you are informed that refund has been received in 18.10.2018. The seniority list of refund upto 2018 has been displayed on website of HBH i.e www.hbh.gov.in and the refund will be me to you on turn”.

 Whereas when complainant made an enquiry on his part also came to know that the OPs are refunding payment to the people as per their own choice by using pick and choose policy out of alleged seniority list, even names of some persons have not been put in the alleged seniority list. The complainant has already been waiting for refund of his own money since two years. Thereafter, complainant also sent representation before the Hon’ble Chairman/Commissioner Haryana Human Rights Commission, Panchkula, twice through speed post, but is of no avail. In this way there was deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Hence complainant filed the present complaint.

2.             On notice, OPs appeared and filed written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus standi and jurisdiction. On merits, it is pleaded that complaint qua the facts moving application before the OP no.1 for cancellation of said BPL flat with a request for the refund of Rs.88,000/- is a matter of record. It is submitted that after accepting the said application, OP no.1 had not given any assurance to the complainant rather it was intimated that the refundable amount will be given by the office of the OP no.2 after completing all formalities as per seniority list uploaded on the website of the Department. It is further submitted that OP no.1, vide letter no.HBH/(EM) 2018/170 dated 08.01.2018 had sent the refund case of the complainant to the office of the OP no.2 and the refund of the complainant is under process and will be disbursed as per seniority list uploaded on the website of the Department. It is denied that the OPs are refunding payment to the people as per their own choice by using pick and choose policy out of alleged seniority list, even names of some persons have not been put in the alleged seniority list. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             Parties then led their respective evidence.

4.             Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.CW1/A, application for refund dated 31.10.2017 Ex.C1, application dated 19.01.2018 Ex.C2, letter dated 08.01.2018 of OP no.1 Ex.C3, request letter of complainant dated 10.09.2019 Ex.C4, Action Taken Report no.7620 dated 06.12.2019 Ex.C5, letter no.HBH/CRO(PM)/2019/7621 dated 06.12.2019 on CM Portal Ex.C6, treatment record of father, wife and daughter of complainant Ex.C7, complaint before Hon’ble Human Rights Haryana Ex.C8, postal receipt dated 14.12.2019 Ex.C9, postal dated 30.12.2019 Ex.C10, request letter of Nand Lal dated 14.09.2017, vide which refund order to be release Ex.C11, refund letter of HBH in favour of Nand Lal dated 27.09.2017 Ex.C12, Action Taken report dated 13.12.2019 of Gulshan, in which refund released Ex.C13, cheque dated 04.12.2019 in favour of Gulshan Ex.C14, seniority list of refund for the year 2018 Ex.C15 and closed the evidence by suffering separate statement.

5.             On the other hand, OPs tendered into evidence affidavit of Partap Singh Saini Manager Ex.OPW1/A, seniority list of consumers Ex.OP1 and closed the evidence on 27.10.2021 by suffering separate statement.

6.             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

7.             Learned counsel for complainant, while reiterating the contents of the complaint, has vehemently argued that the complainant had applied for the allotment of residential BPL flat under Karnal 10215 BPL scheme with the OPs and paid Rs.88000/-. Lateron, due to family circumstances, he was unable to deposit the further amount and he moved an application dated 31.10.2017 for cancellation of flat in question, vide application Ex.C1. The said application of the complainant was duly accepted by the OP and intimated the complainant that the cancellation of flat in question has been approved and a letter dated 08.01.2018 has been sent by the OP no.1 to the office of OP no.2 for refund the amount of Rs.83600/-  but till date complainant has not received any amount. He further argued that OPs have issued a seniority list on its website with regard to refund of the money. On enquiry complainant found that some persons have received the money whose name falls below the name of the complainant in the seniority list. Hence, prayed for allowing the complaint.

8.             Per contra, learned counsel for OPs, while reiterating the contents of the written version, has vehemently argued that refundable amount will be given by the OPs after completing all the formalities as per seniority list uploaded on the website of the Department. He further argued that the refund case of the complainant is under process and amount will be disbursed as per seniority list uploaded on the website of the Department. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

9.             It is admitted case that the complainant had deposited an amount of Rs.88,000/-for allotment of the flat in question with the OPs.  It is also admitted fact that complainant moved an application Ex.C1 dated 31.10.2017 with the OP for cancellation of flat in question and the same was accepted by the OP.

10.           As per version of the complainant he is unable to deposit the further amount with the OP so, he moved the application for refund of his amount as he was facing financial crisis. His father was having heart problem and had taken outdoor treatment. So, the entire responsibility of the family came on the shoulders of the complainant. To prove his version complainant placed on record treatment record Ex.C7. On the other hand, the OPs have pleaded that they did not have the finances to refund the amount of all the applications and hence a seniority list had been prepared for refunding the amounts deposited by the applicants, who had invested amount for purchasing the flat by way of allotment. The name of the complainant in the seniority list Ex.C15 was at serial no.2925 for the year 2018.

11.           As per seniority list Ex.C15 the name of the complainant falls at serial no.2925 and the name of Gulshan falls at serial no.5525. It is evident from Ex.C14 copy of cheque no.861089 dated 04.12.2021 an amount of Rs.69000/- has been refunded to Gulshan, whose name falls at serial no.5525. It has been proved on the record that OPs had using the pick and choose policy as per their own choice. The same is not justified in the eyes of law. Hence, we are of the considered view that the act of the OPs amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by not refunding the amount to the complainant.

12.           Thus, as a sequel to abovesaid discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the OPs to pay Rs.83,600/- to the complainant with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of cancellation of flat i.e.31.10.2017 till its realization. We further direct the OP to pay Rs.15,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment suffered by him and Rs.5500/- for the litigation expense. This order shall be complied within 45 days from the receipt of copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated: 07.01.2022                                                                    

                                                                      President,

                                                      District Consumer Disputes

                                                      Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

 

 

 (Vineet Kaushik)            (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary)

                     Member                         Member