DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, LUCKNOW
CASE No.153 of 2008
Sri Pramod Kumar Agnihotri, aged about 58 yrs.,
S/o Late Pt. Krishna Dutt Agnihotri ,
R/o B Block, H.No.154-B,
Basant Kunj Colony, Hardoi Road,
Dubagga, P.S. Kakori, Post- Barawan Kala,
Lucknow-226101.
……Complainant
Versus
Lucknow Development Authority,
Vipin Khand, Gomti Nagar,
Lucknow.
Through its Vice Chairman. .......Opp. Party
Present:-
Sri Vijai Varma, President.
Smt. Anju Awasthy, Member.
JUDGMENT
This complaint has been filed by the Complainant against the OP for payment of Rs.1,05,600.00 and cost of case of Rs.10,000.00 and Rs.1,11,335.00 with 16% interest from 15.04.2007.
The case in brief of the Complainant is that he applied for a plot measuring 200 sq. mt. in the Nehru Enclave Scheme of the OP by depositing Rs.40,000.00 on 12.03.1991 but as no information thereafter was received by the Complainant, hence on 15.07.1993 he sent a registered letter to the OP requesting them to allot the plot or land in Nehru Enclave Scheme but no information was given. Subsequently, he came to know that the litigation is pending between the LDA and the Army Administration regarding the land in question. Thereafter the Complainant applied for allotment of a plot in Basantkunj Scheme as an opportunity was given to the persons who were not allotted any property in any scheme provided they had
-2-
deposited the registration amount with the LDA. Hence, he deposited the difference of the registration amount of Rs.7,000.00 as the registration amount to be deposited with the OP was Rs.47,000.00 and the Complainant had already deposited Rs.40,000.00 in 1991. As per the scheme of the LDA the remaining amount of the sale consideration of the plot of 200 sq.mt. was to be deposited in 2 years in 8 tri monthly instalments without any interest. The LDA prepared the allotment letter on 03.03.2005 but it came to the knowledge of the Complainant in the last week of June, 2005. Thereafter on the representation of the Complainant, the LDA allowed the payment of the cost of the property in 8 quarterly instalments of Rs.79,292.00 each as per the dates given in the complaint. The Complainant had already deposited two instalments of Rs.79,292.00 on 15.07.2005 and 15.11.2005 and thereafter on 11.11.2005 he requested for the interest to be paid on Rs.40,000.00 deposited by him in LDA on 12.03.1991 till 11.12.2003 as all these years a sum of Rs.40,000.00 remained with the OP. Besides, in the instant scheme there was a provision for not paying any interest but the OP has also charged interest on the instalments as the estimated cost in the allotment letter of the property in question has been shown as Rs.5,70,000.00 but as per letter dated 26.06.2005 the total cost of property comes to Rs.6,81,336.00 which clearly shows that the OP also charged interest amounting to Rs.1,11,335.00 which is against the promise made by the OP. The OP vide letter dated 31.01.2006 informed the Complainant that no interest will be payable on the deposited amount of Rs.40,000.00 from 14.03.1991 to 12.12.2003 though there is the provision in the booklet issued by the OP regarding the Nehru Enclave Scheme which shows that in case a registered allottee is not provided with any property, the amount deposited by him for registration shall be refunded together with the 6% interest in case it lies with the LDA for more than
-3-
one year, hence the Complainant is entitled to the interest from 14.03.1991 to 12.12.2003 as the OP is realising penal interest @ 16% p.a. which is against the settled principle of law and therefore it amounts to unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. Now w.e.f. 29.06.1993, instead of 6%, 9% interest has been allowed. As the Complainant was in the urgent need for residential house, hence he deposited total amount of Rs.7,53,236.00 the cost of the property and Rs.75,400.00 towards stamp duty and got the sale deed registered in his favour alongwith his wife Smt. Neelam Agnihotri. Since the OP has realised illegal interest, hence this complaint for refunding of the amount illegally realised from him with interest and also for compensation.
The OP has filed the WS wherein it is mainly submitted that due to litigation with the Army Administration the land, that was to be acquired for Nehru Enclave, Gomti Nagar Housing Scheme, could not be acquired and the LDA was making all out efforts to put an end to the litigation and it was in the expectation that the matter will be resolved soon and the completion of development work and allotment of plots to the intending persons shall be made, the Complainant was not informed individually though the fact remained that the news was appearing in the newspapers in this regard. No letter dated 09.02.1998 was received in the office of the OP. The Complainant knew it fully well that a litigation with the Army Administration is going on for the land in question due to which it was neither possible to carry out the development work in the area nor it was possible to work out the probable date of allotment of plot. The letter dated 02.02.2000 stated to be sent by the Complainant has not been received in the office of the OP. It was opened to the Complainant to have claimed for the refund of the amount deposited by him in case he was in hurry and he could not have waited for the decision to come
-4-
and disputes to be resolved. When the dispute could not be resolved the LDA in order to adjust such waiting persons in Basantkunj Scheme, Hardoi Road, Lucknow a specific notification was published on 09.12.2003 in leading daily newspapers in which it was envisaged that all such registered persons who have not been allotted any plot or house in any of the scheme may apply for plot/house in Basantkunj Scheme if they are willing to take the same in Basantkunj Scheme and all such intending persons may get their registration renewed by 15.12.2003. All such registered persons who had deposited registration money for allotment of plot/house in any of the schemes may get their money transferred in Basantkunj Yojna and for the purpose they will have to apply for transfer of money by enclosing a copy of the challan of the money deposited. In case of any difference in old deposited amount and the registration money required for Basantkunj Yojna the difference will be paid by the applicant. In the instant case, the Complainant deposited difference of Rs.7,000.00 and got his registration renewed for Basantkunj Yojna. The allotment order was sent to the Complainant through letter dated 03.03.2005. The copy of the allotment letter issued to the Complainant was made available to him on his request. There is no provision to allow interest on registration money and it is allowed only in case where the LDA for any unforeseen reasons fails to allot the plots/houses to the applicants. The registration money has been transferred from one scheme to another new scheme for allotment of plot to the Complainant and as such there was no question of paying any interest to the Complainant on the amount which was deposited by him earlier for having a plot under the scheme and which was transferred to another scheme on his application for having a plot in another scheme. As for charging of interest in fixing of instalments is concerned, the LDA is an autonomous body which works on no profit no loss basis. It raises loans from
-5-
different financial institutions for carrying out the development work of site and construction of houses etc. and have to pay interest to these financial institutions in turn. LDA has no other source to replenish the amount of interest. When the cost of the plot was to be paid in instalments in two years, it was obvious that the Complainant had to pay interest for the period of repayment. Interest on registration amount is paid only when the allottee is not provided with any property and the Complainant has not been provided with the property. He has been allotted a property in Basantkunj Scheme and the amount of registration deposited earlier for Nehru Enclace was transferred to the Basantkunj Scheme with his consent. There has been no failure on the part of the OP to provide any property to the Complainant against the registration money deposited by him, hence there is no question of paying the interest on the deposited amount to the Complainant. There has been no unfair trade practice on the part of the OP and the Complainant is not entitled to get any interest on the amount deposited by him. The Complainant is not entitled to claim any relief as he has already been allotted the property in Basantkunj Scheme and for which the sale deed has already been executed in favour of the Complainant and the complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost.
The OP has also filed an additional WS wherein it is mainly submitted that all the formalities regarding registration has been completed and there was no delay in getting the sale deed registered and therefore there is no deficiency in service. Besides there is no such regulations to make payment of interest on the registration amount after sale deed, hence the Complainant is not entitled to any relief and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
The Complainant has filed his affidavit and 14 annexures with the complaint. The OP has filed the affidavit of Sri K.K. Singh, Property Officer, LDA and Ambi Bisht, Under Secretary, LDA with 10 annexures.
-6-
Heard Counsel for the parties and perused the entire record.
Now, it is to be seen as to whether the OP has realised illegal interest from the Complainant and therefore committed unfair trade practice or deficiency in service or not and if so, its consequences.
In this regard, it is not disputed that the Complainant had got himself registered in a scheme under Nehru Enclave Scheme for allotment of a plot measuring 200 sq. mt. by depositing Rs.40,000.00 on 12.03.1991. It is also not disputed that the scheme did not take off because of the dispute arising with the Army Administration and LDA. It is also a fact that when a scheme for allotment of plots in Basantkunj Scheme at Hardoi Road was opened then the Complainant was also allowed to deposit registration fee of Rs.47,000.00 and as Rs.40,000.00 was already deposited with the OP, hence the Complainant deposited Rs.7,000.00 for the aforesaid scheme. It is also a fact that the Complainant was to deposit 8 instalments of Rs.79,292.00 whereas the cost of the property in question as divulged in the allotment letter was shown to be Rs.5,70,000.00 and no interest was payable on this cost of the property but having made payment of all the 8 instalments it transpires that the Complainant had paid Rs.6,81,336.00, in place of Rs.5,70,000.00 which means Rs.1,11,335.00 was taken as interest on the amount of Rs.5,70,000.00. It is vehemently argued by the learned Counsel for the OP that no interest is to be paid on the registration amount after registration of the sale deed and therefore no interest is to be paid on Rs.40,000.00 which was deposited by the Complainant in the year 1991. On the contrary, it is vehemently argued by the learned Counsel for the Complainant that he had deposited the amount of Rs.40,000.00 on 12.03.1991 and he was not allotted any property and the amount remained with the OP till 11.12.2003 when he applied for the allotment of a plot in
-7-
Basantkunj Scheme. It is to be noted that anyone who is applying on 11.12.2003 for allotment of a plot in Basantkunj Scheme, Hardoi Road of the OP was to deposit Rs.47,000.00 on 11.12.2003. The Complainant’s amount of Rs.40,000.00 remained with the OP from 12.03.1991 till 11.12.2003 and it is certainly an unfair trade practice to equate this amount of Rs.40,000.00 deposited on 12.03.1991 plus Rs.7,000.00 deposited by the Complainant on 11.12.2003 at par with anyone applying on 11.12.2003 by depositing Rs.47,000.00, as obviously a sum of Rs.40,000.00 which remained with the OP must have swelled to some extent in this period of 12.03.1991 to 11.12.2003, therefore obviously it is wrong on the part of the OP to treat Rs.40,000.00 deposited on 12.03.1991 at par Rs.40,000.00 plus Rs.7,000.00 deposited on 11.12.2003. Therefore, there is no merit in the contention of the OP that no interest is to be paid on Rs.40,000.00 deposited by the Complainant in 1991. It is an unfair trade practice on the part of the OP as also deficiency in service in not giving interest on the amount of Rs.40,000.00 to the Complainant, hence the Complainant is entitled to this amount. Now, here, the question arises as to how much interest the Complainant is entitled to have. The Complainant has claimed 9% interest on the amount deposited on the basis of the resolution of the LDA dated 13.08.2009 of the LDA wherein it was decided to allow 9% interest to the unsuccessful allottees of the Nehru Enclave Scheme. Since in the instant case scheme concerning the plot of the Complainant for which the Complainant had deposited Rs.40,000.00 became unsuccessful, therefore, on the basis of the resolution of the OP the Complainant is entitled to 9% interest p.a. on the sum of Rs.40,000.00 from 12.03.1991 to 11.12.2003.
Now, we take up the next point i.e. whether the OP has charged interest on the 8 instalments wrongly or not. In this regard, the Complainant has filed a photocopy of the property
-8-
allotment letter in the Basantkunj Scheme, Hardoi Road where the estimated cost is shown as Rs.5,70,000.00 and thereafter letter where the Complainant was asked to deposit the amount in the 8 equal instalment of Rs.79,292.00 was issued which is filed as annexure 10 by the Complainant with the complaint.
The Complainant has also filed the booklet of the Basantkunj Scheme in question where with regard to the depositing of the amount it is specifically mentioned that the balance amount is to be deposited in 8 quarterly instalments without interest as is evident from the page No.35 of the booklet of the scheme in question. In the booklet it is specifically mentioned that the balance amount is to be recovered in 8 quarterly instalments without any interest. But the total amount of 8 quarterly instalments of Rs.79,292.00 per instalment, comes to Rs.6,34,336.00, in addition to Rs.47,000.00 deposited as registration amount which makes the total cost payable as Rs.6,81,336.00 whereas, as per the allotment letter the cost of the property was Rs.5,70,000.00 which means the Complainant was made to pay excess amount of Rs.1,11,336.00. There is nothing to show that the cost of the property escalated from what it was divulged in the allotment letter i.e. Rs.5,70,000.00 and as discussed above, no interest was payable on the balance amount to be paid in 8 quarterly instalments, therefore there is no justification for the OP in charging this excess amount of Rs.1,11,336.00. There is clear cut unfair trade practice as also deficiency in service in charging this excess amount from the Complainant. Since the OP has committed unfair trade practice as also deficiency in service in first not paying interest on Rs.40,000.00 from 12.03.1991 to 11.12.2003 and thereafter charging excess amount of Rs.1,11,336.00 through 8 quarterly instalments of Rs.79,292.00, therefore the Complainant is entitled to get 9% interest on Rs.40,000.00 from 12.03.1991 to 11.12.2003 which comes to Rs.45,600.00. Thus, the Complainant is entitled to get Rs.45,600.00 and Rs.1,11,336.00 totalling Rs.1,56,936.00
-9-
with 9% interest from the OP. Since the Complainant has also been harassed in this regard, hence he is entitled to compensation as well as cost of the litigation.
ORDER
The complaint is partly allowed. The OP is directed to pay the amount of Rs.1,56,936.00 (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Six Thousand Nine Hundred Thirty Six Only) with 9% interest from the date of filing of the case till the final payment is made to the complainant.
The OP is also directed to pay Rs.6,000.00 (Rupees Six Thousand only) as compensation and Rs.4,000.00 (Rupees Four Thousand only) as cost of the litigation. The compliance of the order is to be made within a month.
(Anju Awasthy) (Vijai Varma)
Member President
Dated: 4 June, 2015
