Haryana

Kurukshetra

225/2016

Satyan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Housing Board - Opp.Party(s)

Rattan Singh

19 Apr 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KURUKSHETRA.

 

Complaint no. 225/16.

Date of instt.03.08.16. 

                                                Date of Decision: 19.04.2018.

 

Satyavan son of Mange Ram, resident of village and post office Manjala, now resident of House No.1540/16, Rishi Nagar, Division Kaithal, District Kaithal.                                                                                                                                                                 ……….Complainant.      

                        Versus

1. Administrator Housing Board, Haryana, Housing Board Colony, Sector-4, Shop No.9-10, Kurukshetra.
2. Chief Administrator, Housing Board, Haryana, Plot No.C-15, Aawas Bhawan, Sector-6, Panchkula.     

                                                            ……..Opposite Parties.

 

       Complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act.            

 

Before       Sh. G.C. Garg, President.    

Sh. Kapil Dev Sharma, Member.

                       

Present :    Sh. Rattan Singh Panwar, Adv. for complainant.

Sh. Subhash Chand Saini, Adv. for OPs.

 

ORDER

 

                    This is a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 moved by Satyavan complainant against Administrator, Housing Board, Haryana and another, the opposite parties.

2.             It is stated in the complaint that Ops advertised for flats for BPL families in Sector 32/29 of Housing Board, Kurukshetra in the year, 2010. The complainant applied for the said flats under the scheme to the Ops under application No.41740 and draw was taken place on 11.3.2011 under Porvn. Regn. No.2036 final Regn. No.227 and allotted flat No.227/32, Tenement No.2385-SF in housing Board Colony, Sector-32, Kurukshetra. The complainant received a letter vide memo No.HVN/CRO(PN)/2011/8574 dated 10.6.2011 regarding allotment of flat and asked to provide self attested BPL and an affidavit in this regard that the complainant and his family members are not having any plot in housing board and also directed to pay Rs.37,000/- to the Ops before 30.6.2011. The complainant deposited the amount of Rs.37,000/- through bank draft in favour of Ops. The complainant received letter from Haryana Gramin Bank, Kaithal on 16.5.2011. The complainant deposited an amount of Rs.37,000/- through bank draft No.013182-16034002 in PNB Ratgal in favour of Ops and deposited all the required documents. On 2^nd May, 2013 the allotment letter was given and directed to deposit some amount including Rs.86,000/- additional charges as preferential house + interst Rs.12,370/- and two advance installments of Rs.1477/- + Rs.1477/- = Rs.2954/- total amount of Rs.1,0,1829/- was paid to the Ops on 31.5.2013 in PNB Ratgal. It was assured by the Ops that the remaining amount in installments of Rs.1477/- per month to be paid in 20 years. The Ops assured that the possession of flat will be given within 30 days of deposited of the above said amount. After 30 days, the complainant approached to Ops and asked to deliver the possession of flat. The complainant approached the Ops many a times to deliver the possession of the flat but every time the matter was postponed on one pretext or the another and do not hear the genuine request of the complainant and lastly issued another letter dated 11.4.2016 and increased the principal amount as mentioned at the time of advertisement from Rs.3,26,400/- to Rs.3,33,400/- and also increased the amount of installments from Rs.1477/- to Rs.1842/- for 13 years in place of 20 years. The Ops also demanded Rs.46,400/- from the complainant without any reason. The Ops threatened to cancel allotment letter within 30 days if the complainant not deposited the illegal amount as demanded by the Ops. The Ops further issued letter dated 2.6.2016 and 30.6.2016 and directed to deposit the illegal amount before 16.8.2016 failing which allotment will be cancelled. It is settled law that interest can only be charged after the offer of possession, but in the present complaint, the possession is not offered till today by the Ops to the complainant, so the complainant is not liable to pay any illegal amount or interest as demanded by the Ops. The complainant requested the Ops many a times to withdraw the above said letters, but they did not pay any heed.  Thus, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OPs. Hence, in such like circumstances, the present complaint was moved by the complainant with the prayer to direct the OPs to deliver the offer of possession, to take the amount of installment as offered at the time of advertisement, not to demand the illegal amount, to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment and to pay Rs.10,000/- as costs of litigation.

3.            Upon notice, opposite parties appeared and contested the complaint by filing written statement taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable against the Op; that the complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint; that the complainant is estopped from filing the present complaint by his own act and conduct; that the complainant has filed the present complaint against the revision in cost of house from Rs.3,64,000/- to Rs.3,33,400/-; that the cost advertised at the time of floatation of scheme is “tentative price” and the final cost of house is worked out at the time of allotment of house to the successful applicants. In this case also, the house was initially advertised at “tentative cost of Rs.3,64,000/- but at the time of final allotment , the final cost was worked out as Rs.3,33,400/-; that the Housing Board Haryana works on “no profit no loss” policy in an effort to provide affordable housing to BPL and EWS people, thus it is entirely wrong that the cost has been increased purposely; that the complainant was declared successful in the draw of lots held for BPL families on 11.3.2011 and after draw as per policy of Board, the complainant was directed vide Memo No.HBH/CRO(PM)/2011/5574 dated 10.6.2011 to deposit a sum of Rs.37,000/- towards 10% amount of the tentative cost of flat. The complainant also deposited an amount of Rs.37,000/- at the time of registration. Thereafter, when the construction of flats was completed, the draw of flat numbers was held on 18.4.2013 and after the draw of flats numbers, as per terms and conditions of allotment, the allottee was required to pay 50% amount of final cost of the flat and remaining 50% he had to pay in monthly installments. Thus, the complainant was directed to deposit an amount of Rs..1,0,1829/- vide letter bearing Memo No.1250 dated 2.5.2013 and the same was deposited. However, before possession could be offered to the complainant, some CWPs were filed before the Hon’ble High Court regarding irregularities in allotment of flats to BPL families and during pendency said possession of flat could not be offered to the complainant and when the litigation finally ended, the final cost was worked out again and the final cost was revised from Rs.3,64,000/- to Rs.3,33,400/- the installment amount was also increased. Besides this, the monthly liability which Housing Board Haryana had to bear due to non allotment of already constructed building was calculated as Rs.1,0,0230/- and therefore, the answering Ops sent letter dated 11.4.2016 directing the complainant to deposit a sum of Rs.46,400/- within thirty days and to take the possession of the above said plot within thirty days from the date of issuance of letter; that the details of the amount is that allotment money Rs.92,700/-, cost of HPTA Rs.10/-, interest of 39 months Rs.1,00,230/-, two installments of Rs.1847/- x 2 = Rs.3694/-, total amount Rs.1,96,634/-. It was also informed to the complainant that the price of flat has been revised from Rs.3,21,000/- to Rs.3,33,400/- and Ops have also given rebate on interest @ 9% per annum on deposit of Rs.74,000/- and also granted rebate on the amount of Rs.1,01,829/- @ 9.25% per annum on allotment money to the complainant; that vide Agenda item No.193.7 dated 31.10.2010 to charge interest @ 8% (except on land cost) and to increase the recovery period from 13 years to 20 years to make the cost more affordable. Lateron, it was decided by the Hon’ble Chief Minister vide note dated 23.11.2012 to charge interest @ 9.25%, so interest has been charged in costing @ 9.25% per annum. Hence, in view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs. On merits the contents of the complaints were denied. Preliminary objections were repeated. Prayer for dismissal of the complaint was made.

4.             Both the parties have led their respective evidence to prove their version.

5.             We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record carefully.

6.             From the pleadings and evidence of the case, it is clear that the only dispute between the parties is with regard to non-issuance of possession letter of the flat in question.  The contention of Ops is that the complainant did not deposit the required amount of Rs.46,400/- with the Ops.  In these circumstances, the complainant is entitled to get possession of flat in question, subject to payment of Rs.46,400/- with the Ops.

7.             In view of above discussion, the complaint of complainant is allowed and we direct the Ops to issue the possession letter of the flat in question in favour of the complainant and the complainant is directed to make payment of the remaining amount of Rs.46,400/- with the Ops.  The order; be complied within a period of 60 days, failing which, penal action under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 would be initiated against the opposite parties.  Copy of this order be communicated to the parties free of cost.  File be consigned to record after due compliance. 

Announced in open court:

Dt.:19.04.2018. 

                                                                        (G.C.Garg)

                                                                        President.

 

 

(Kapil Dev Sharma)         

                                        Member