BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MYSORE-570023

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.1070-2010

DATED ON THIS THE 15^th July 2016

      Present:  1) Sri. H.M.Shivakumara Swamy

B.A., LLB., - PRESIDENT   

    2) Smt. M.V.Bharathi                    

                                   B.Sc., LLB., -  MEMBER

                     3) Sri. Devakumar.M.C.                  

                                                          B.E., LLB.,    - MEMBER

Sri Devakumar.M.C.

Member

1.     The complainant has filed the complaint under section 12 of the C.P.Act, against the opposite parties, alleging deficiency in service and seeking various reliefs in respect of the house allotted in favour of her late husband and with cost and such other reliefs.
2.     The complainant’s late husband has been allotted a Ashraya house bearing No.527, measuring 20 x 30 feet situated in Block No.4, of Gorur Village at Mysore Taluk under Rajiv Gandhi Rural Housing Scheme of the Government.  Aggrieved by the delay in delivery of the possession of the allotted house, use of substandard material for construction of non-providing of basic civic amenities etc., The complainant filed the complaint, seeking reliefs alleging deficiency on the part of opposite parties.
3.     The opposite party Nos.1 and 4 remained absent and placed exparte.
4.     The opposite party Nos.2 and 3 denying the allegation of deficiencies in service, submits that the house has been allotted to the complainant’s late husband.  The Ashraya Housing Scheme in the scheme of the Government launched under Rajiv Gandhi Rural Housing Scheme for providing shelter to the poor publics in the society.  The government has released funds to the construction company and the project is in progress.  After completion of the entire work and on handing over the houses to the custody of the opposite parties, delivery of the possession will be handed over to the allottees.  As such, no deficiency on their part and prays for dismissal of the complaint.
5.     The complainant filed affidavit in lieu of evidence and placed several documents.  Opposite party Nos.2 and 3 also filed its affidavit in lieu of its evidence.  Written arguments filed by both side and also made oral submissions.  After perusal of the material on record, matter posted for orders.
6.     The following points arise for our consideration are as follows:-

1. Whether the complaint is maintainable?
2. Whether the complainant established the deficiencies in service on the part of opposite parties, in not delivering the possession of house allotted in favour of her late husband with all basic amenities, suitable for dwelling and thereby entitled for the reliefs sought?
3. What order?

7.    Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

Point No.1 :- In the negative.

Point No.2 :- Does not call for discussion.

Point No.3 :- As per final order for the following

:: R E A S O N S ::

8.    Point No.1:- Admittedly the house bearing No.527, in Block No.4, measuring 20 x 30 feet situated at Gorur Village, Mysore Taluk has been allotted to the complainant’s late husband Sri K>B.Subramnya Raje Urs, under Rajiv Gandhi Rural Housing Scheme of Government at concessional rate.  However, the complainant alleged deficiencies by the opposite parties, such as non delivery of the possession of the house, usuage of sub-standard material in construction of the house, not providing the minimum basic amenities etc., by placing several documents. The opposite party Nos.2 and 3 have also contended that the complainant is not a consumer under the C.P.Act 1986 and she is not a consumer, as such she cannot maintain the complaint, before this Forum.  Hence, prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
9.    Considering the documentary evidence placed on record by the complainant and the evidence lead by the parties, the complainant is a poor widow struggling to get a shelter, since many years and based on the assurances of the opposite parties to hand over the possession of the house after taking the possession of those houses from the construction company, we are of the opinion that as there are several issues to be adjudicated upon, the matter is to be dealt with in detail. In view of the judgement reported in 1993 (1) CPR 571 (G.Patil V/s New India Assurance Co.,) this matter involves complicated question of law and facts and it is to be heard by the Civil Court and not by Consumer Forum.  The proceedings before this Forum are summary in nature, it is just and necessary to direct the complainant to seek remedy before the appropriate competent court of law with the above observations the complaint filed by the complainant is hereby dismissed as not maintainable.  Accordingly, the point No.1 is answered in the negative.
10. Point No.2:- In view of the above observations, point No.2 does not survive for discussions.
11. Point No.3:- With the above, we proceed to pass the following

:: O R D E R ::

1. The complaint is dismissed as not maintainable.
2. Give the copies of this order to the parties, as per Rules.