Haryana

Karnal

CC/478/2019

Chetan - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Estate Manager, Housing Board Haryana - Opp.Party(s)

Sanjeev Kamboj

17 Nov 2021

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                         Complaint No. 478 of 2019

                                                          Date of instt.01.08.2019

                                                          Date of Decision 17.11.2021

 

Chetan son of Shri Kamal Kishore resident of house no.2388, Roop Colony, Sadar Bazar, Karnal.

                                                …….Complainant.

 

                                      Versus

 

The Estate Manager, Housing Board Haryana, Sector-3, Karnal.

 

                                                                …..Opposite Party.

 

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.       

      Sh. Vineet Kaushik…….Member

 

Argued by: Shri Sanjeev Kamboj, counsel for complainant.

                   Shri Virender Sachdeva, counsel for OP.

 

                    (Jaswant Singh President)

ORDER:

 

                The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (as after amendment under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019) against the opposite party (hereinafter referred to as ‘OP’) on the averments that complainant belongs to the BPL category and he applied for allotment of a flat under the BPL category with the OP and in the draw of lots held by the OP, BPL House no.1326/GF in sector 28-A, Alpha City Karnal was allotted to the complainant, vide allotment letter no.2237 dated 26.09.2017.  The complainant has paid the entire amount as per the payment schedule given by the OP to the complainant, vide letter bearing memo no.1908 dated 29.08.2017. After getting the required payment as per the said letter, OP offered the possession letter to the complainant, vide letter dated 26.09.2017. It is further averred that complainant received a letter no.6663 dated 21.11.2018 from the OP, vide which demand of an amount of Rs.28880/- has been made as GST @ 12% on the cost of the aforesaid flat. The said demand of OP is quite illegal, null and void and not binding upon the complainant because at the time of demanding application for allotment of flats, no such condition was applicable. On receipt of the said letter, complainant approached the OP and requested for withdrawing the same as he is not able to pay the same but OP refused to withdraw the said amount and then complainant requested to OP that in such circumstances he is not willing to keep the said flat and requested to refund the payment made by him to OP but OP refused to do so. In this way there was deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. Hence complainant filed the present complaint.

2.             On notice, OP appeared and filed written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; locus standi; estoppal; jurisdiction and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is pleaded that GST to the tune of Rs.28880/- has been demanded as per the letter no.4805 dated 23.05.2018 issued by the Head office of the OP and the instruction of the Government. The monthly installment has been changed as per GST applicable w.e.f.01.07.2017. Hence, the demand of GST is legal and valid. It is further pleaded that since the abovesaid amount rightly demanded from the complainant and as such there arises no question at all of withdrawing the same. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP. The other allegations mentioned in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             Parties then led their respective evidence.

4.             Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.CW1/A, allotment letter Ex.C1, possession letter Ex.C2, allotment of BPL House no.1326/GF Ex.C3, letter dated 21.11.2018, vide which OP demanding of GST Rs.28,880/- Ex.C4, installments receipts Ex.C5 to Ex.C10, photocopy of phamplet with regard to “now their home without GST under Pradhan Mantri Jan Awas Yojana” and closed the evidence on 14.02.2020 by suffering separate statement.

5.             On the other hand, OP tendered into evidence affidavit of Partap Singh Saini, Estate Manater Housing Board Ex.OP1/A, allotment letter Ex.OP2, possession letter dated 26.09.2017 Ex.OP3, allotment letter dated 26.09.2017 of BPL House no.1326/GF Ex.OP4, letter dated 21.11.2018, vide which OP demanded Rs.28880/- as GST Ex.OP5, reply to Information under RTI Act Ex.OP6, application of complainant to OP under RTI Act Ex.OP7 and closed the evidence on 21.08.2021 by suffering separate statement.

6.             We have appraised the evidence on record, the material circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

7.             Learned counsel for complainant, while reiterating the contents of the complaint, has vehemently argued that complainant belongs to the BPL category and applied for allotment of a flat under the BPL category with the OP. Complainant allotted a BPL house no.1326/GF in Sector-28-A, Alfa City Karnal, vide allotment letter dated 26.09.2017.  Complainant has paid all the installment as per schedule of the OP. On 21.11.2018 complainant received a letter, vide which OP demanded Rs.28,880/- as GST @ 12% on the cost of the aforesaid flat. He further argued that the said demand is illegal, null and void as at the time of demanding application for allotment of flats, no such condition was applicable. Hence, prayed for allowing the complaint.

8.             Per contra, learned counsel for OP, while reiterating the contents of the written version, has vehemently argued that GST has been demanded from the complainant as per the instructions and guidelines issued by the Government as per letter no.4805 dated 23.05.2018. The monthly installment has been changed as per GST applicable w.e.f. 01.07.2017. Hence, the demand of the GST is legal and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

9.             Admittedly, the flat in question was allotted to the complainant in the BPL category, vide allotment letter dated 26.09.2017.  It is also admitted that the OP demanded Rs.28,880/- from the complainant as GST.

10.           Now the question arises before us for consideration whether the OP is entitled for GST or not?

11.           The complainant purchased a flat from the OP under the BPL category and deposited the cost of the flat as per schedule of the OP. The OP demanded Rs.28,880/-, vide letter Ex.OP/5 dated 21.11.2018 wherein it has been specifically mentioned that the GST is applicable w.e.f.01.07.2017 @ 12% in case of payment of allotment money and installment to Housing Board Haryana for the property  allotted after 01.07.2017.  The flat in question has been allotted to the complainant on 26.09.2017. Moreover, on perusal of the allotment letter Ex.C1(OP/2) it does not reveal that GST could not be charged from the allottees at any stage. The complainant relied upon the document Ex.C11 wherein it has been mentioned that under the Pradhan Mantri Jan Awas Yonja, GST is not applicable upon this scheme but the said document does not bear any date, month or year. Hence, it cannot be considered in the present complaint. OP had demanded GST as per the Government instruction.  Hence, the complainant miserably failed to prove his case by leading cogent and convincing evidence.  In view of the above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Hence, the present complaint deserves to be dismissed being devoid of any merits.

12.           Thus, as a sequel to abovesaid discussion, facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any merits in the complainant and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Dated:17.11.2021                                                                     

                                                                  President,

                                                    District Consumer Disputes

                                                    Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

 

                 (Vineet Kaushik)

                      Member