Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/308/2016

Sudhir Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Chandigarh Housing Board - Opp.Party(s)

In person

29 Nov 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

============

Consumer Complaint  No	:	CC/308/2016
Date  of  Institution	:	05/05/2016
Date   of   Decision	:	29/11/2016

 

 

 

 

 

Sudhir Kumar S/o Sh. Nirmal Singh, R/o H.No.2506, Sector 19-C, Chandigarh.

 …………… Complainant.

VERSUS

 

The Chandigarh Housing Board, Jan Marg, Sector 9, Chandigarh, through its Chairman.

……………  Opposite Party

 

BEFORE:    MRS.SURJET KAUR            PRESIDING MEMBER

           SH.SURESH KUMAR SARDANA    MEMBER

 

For Complainant	:	Sh. Ruhani Chadha, Advocate.
For Opposite Party	:	Sh. Indresh Goel, Advocate.

 

PER SURESH KUMAR SARDANA, MEMBER

 

 

          The succinct facts of the present Complaint are that the Complainant had applied for a 3 Bed Room flat under the Self Financing Housing Scheme-2008 for Employees of Chandigarh Administration on 25.02.2008 for which an amount of Rs.1,75,000/- was deposited on the same day vide Demand Draft No. 650840. It has been averred that the Complainant was unsuccessful in the draw of lots held on 04.11.2010. According to the Complainant, his earnest money was returned by the Chandigarh Housing Board on 21.05.2011, after retaining it for a period of 04 months and 17 days after 30 days of draw of lots held on 04.11.2010. It has been alleged that despite this, the Complainant was not given/paid any interest, for which he visited the office of the Opposite Party and even sent various reminders/ applications, but to no avail. With the cup of woes brimming, the Complainant has filed the instant consumer complaint, alleging that the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Party.

 

2.      Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Party seeking its version of the case.

 

3.      Opposite Party, in its reply, while admitting the basic facts of the case has admitted that it had already paid the interest on account of refund on the earnest money by way of Cheque No.680238 dated 16.06.2014 for an amount of Rs.3,065/- drawn on State Bank of India, CHB, Sector 9-D, Chandigarh. It has been pleaded that the aforesaid said interest was paid uniformly to all the unsuccessful applicants on the same date. While admitting the receipt of letters sent by the Complainant, the Opposite Party has asserted that since the interest had already been paid, there was no need of any further action. All other allegations made in the Complaint have been denied and pleading that there was no deficiency in service on its part, Opposite Party has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

 

4.      The complainant has filed a rejoinder, wherein he has reiterated all the averments, contained in the complaint, and repudiated those, contained in the written version of Opposite Party.

 

5.      Parties were permitted to place their respective evidence on record, in support of their contentions.

 

6.      We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. 

 

7.      The main grouse of the Complainant is that he was not paid any interest after the earnest money deposit was retained by the Opposite Party from 25.2.2008 to 20.05.2011.  We have perused the document relating to the Scheme in question, submitted by the Opposite Party, during the course of arguments. Para VIII (v) of the said Scheme is very relevant to the controversy involved, which reads as under: -

 

"VIII     Mode of Allotment: -

         

v)        Refund of unsuccessful applicants shall be made within 30 days of the draw of lots without any interest. In case refund made within the stipulated period, interest shall be allowed at the Savings Bank rate beyond the period of 30 days.”

 

8.      Further, on perusal of the document placed on record at Annexure-A by the Opposite Party, we find that an interest of Rs.3065/- has been paid to the Complainant vide Cheque No.680238 dated 16.06.2014. In these set of circumstances, we are of the opinion that the present Complaint does not survive as the said interest was paid uniformly to all the unsuccessful applicants.

 

9.      Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, we have no hesitation to hold that the Complainant has failed to prove that there has been any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party or that the Opposite Party adopted any unfair trade practice. As such, the Complaint is devoid of any merit and the same is hereby dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

 

10.      Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

29^th Nov., 2016                                          Sd/-

[SURJEET KAUR]

PRESIDING MEMBER

                                               

     

Sd/-                        

[SURESH KUMAR SARDANA]                                                                                                   

“Dutt”                                                                           MEMBER