Kerala

StateCommission

A/14/427

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD - Complainant(s)

Versus

JOSEPH CHACKO - Opp.Party(s)

S SHANAVAS

29 Aug 2016

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

COMMISSION  VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL NO. 427/14

JUDGMENT DATED:29.08.2016

 

PRESENT : 

JUSTICE SHRI. P.Q. BARKATHALI                         :  PRESIDENT

SHRI.V.V. JOSE                                                          : MEMBER

Kerala State Housing Board,

R/by Executive Engineer,

Kottayam Division,                                                            : APPELLANT

Kottayam.

 

(By Adv: Sri. S. Shanavas)

 

            Vs.

 

Joseph Chacko,

F 4-129/GHAS,                                                                     : RESPONDENT

Amalagiri P.O, Kottayam.

 

(By Adv: Sri. Siju K. Unnithan)

 

JUDGMENT

HON.JUSTICE.P.Q.BARKATHALI : PRESIDENT

 

This is an appeal filed by the opposite party in CC.109/12 on the file of Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kottayam challenging the order of the Forum dated, June 16, 2014 allowing the complaint and directing the opposite party to refund Rs.2,51,856/- with interest and a cost of Rs.4000/-.

2.      The case of the complainant as detailed in the complaint before the Forum in brief is this:-

The opposite party is Kerala State Housing Board represented by its Executive Engineer, Kottayam Division.  Complainant applied for the allotment of Housing plot under Housing Accommodation Scheme during the year 1991.  On December 23, 1991 the opposite party allotted housing plot F4-129 having an extent of 317.10 Sq. Mtr with the building for Rs.2,32,703/-.  The sale agreement was executed on December 23, 1991.  As per the agreement the purchase price fixed for the property and the building is tentative and provisional due to the prior owner of the land has preferred land acquisition reference for increased compensation and the same is pending before the Court for final judgment.  He remitted the entire amount as per the agreement.  On November 2008 opposite party again demanded Rs.2,51,856/-.  On November 28, 2008 complainant remitted that amount and opposite party executed the sale deed.  In the sale deed it is provided that opposite party has a right to claim further charges with respect to the LAR cases.  Complainant came to know that in 1991 itself the LAR case was disposed off and no appeal was filed.  Therefore complainant filed the complaint for refund of the said excess amount received by the complainant.

3.      This complaint was originally numbered as CC.56/11.  As the opposite party was set exparte in that complaint, Forum allowed the complaint by order dated, October 20, 2011.  In Appeal.818/11 this Commission by judgment dated, December 15, 2011 set aside that order and remanded the case for fresh disposal.  After remand this complaint was numbered as CC.109/12 by the Forum.  Even thereafter opposite party remained absent.  Therefore Forum accepted the evidence of complainant Exts.A1 to A10 and allowed the complaint.  Opposite party has again come up in appeal challenging the said order of the Forum.

4.      As it is seen from the records that, as it is the second time opposite party was set exparte by the Forum, we have ordered that appeal can be allowed on deposit of the entire amount as ordered by the Forum before this Commission.

5.      As directed by this Commission the opposite party deposited the principal amount of Rs.2,51,856/- and the cost of Rs.4000/- on July 29, 2016.  On a further direction by this Commission he deposited interest portion Rs.2,31,183/- today.  Hence appeal is allowed.  The impugned order of the Forum allowing the complaint is set aside.  Matter is remanded to the Forum for fresh disposal in accordance with law.  Both parties shall appear before the Forum on October 30, 2016.  The Forum shall dispose of the case within six months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

 

 

JUSTICE P.Q. BARKATHALI:  PRESIDENT

 

 

V.V. JOSE : MEMBER

 

VL.