Haryana

Panchkula

CC/52/2018

SH.BALWINDER KUMAR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

THE ESTATE MANAGER,HOUSING BOARD HARYANA. - Opp.Party(s)

AMIT KUMAR SHARMA

24 Jan 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,  PANCHKULA

 

                                                       

Consumer Complaint No	:	52 of 2018
Date of Institution	:	13.03.2018
Date of Decision	:	24.01.2022

 

 

Sh.Balwinder Kumar son of Sh. Ram Chander r/o Village Bhatoli, Post Office Jagadhari, District Yamunanagar.

 

                                                                           ….Complainant

Versus

1.     The Estate Manager, Housing Board Haryana, Plot No.C-15, Awas Bhawan, Sector-6, Panchkula.

2.     The Chief Administrator, Housing Board Haryana, Plot No.C-15, Awas Bhawan, Sector-6, Panchkula.

….Opposite Parties

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986 (AS AMENDED UPTO DATE).

 

Before:              Sh.Satpal, President.

Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini, Member.

 

For the Parties:   Shri Ajay Sharma, Advocate, Counsel for the Complainant.

                        Shri Anil Kumar Garg, Advocate, Counsel for the OPs No.   1 and 2.

 

ORDER

(Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini, Member)

1.             The brief facts of the present complaint are that the Housing Board Haryana offered a scheme of 4530 Built up Triple Storeyed Flats for BPL Families on Hire Purchase Basis in the month of September 2010 and the complainant applied for allotment of flat in this scheme in Yamuna-Nagar. He was declared successful in the draw of lots held on 09.03.2011 for the allotment of flat at Yamunanagar vide letter bearing memo no.HBH/CRO(PM)/2011 3567 dated 03.06.2011 and in the letter OP requested to deposit Rs.37,000/- and same was deposited by the complainant on 28.06.2016. The OP allotted the Flat No.2368 at Ground Floor to the complainant vide allotment letter dated 31.05.2016.  In the allotment letter dated 28.06.2016, OP demanded Rs.2,10,555/- the breakup of the amount was Rs.1,34,300/- being allotment money, Rs.2,309/- being first installment and Rs.73,936/- is as interest for 28 months. The complainant contacted to the officials of OPs and enquired about the interest charged but they failed to give valid reason and instead gave a reply that interest being charged for the delayed payment. Further, as per the brochure, he made the payment of Rs.37,000/- with the application, Rs.37,000/- after draw and at the time of allotment and before possession 50% of the price worked out at the time of allotment and balance 50% to be paid in 156  equated monthly installments (13 years) with 10% interest P.A.(monthly compounding). The OPs issued allotment letter on 31.05.2016 and Rs. 73,936/- charged by them is illegal and against the terms and conditions of the allotment and brochure. There is no delay on the part of the complainant.  Due to the act and conduct of the OPs, the complainant has suffered financial loss, mental agony and harassment. Hence, the present complaint.

2.             Upon notice, OPs appeared through counsel and filed written statement raising preliminary objections qua complaint is not maintainable being false and frivolous and suppressed the material facts. On merits, it is stated that the complainant was issued allotment by Housing Board Haryana, Yamunanagar  vide letter no.375 dated 31.05.2016, allotting Flat No.2368/GF in Sector-12, Yamunanagar and terms and conditions of the allotment were duly mentioned on the overleaf of allotment letter. Moreover, price of the flat, registration deposit, amount deposited after draw of lots, first installment and monthly liability @Rs.3211/- per month and balance price of the flat payable in monthly installments of Rs.2,309/- per month over a period of 13 years was duly mentioned in the allotment letter. The OP has been clearly mentioned the monthly liability @3211/- per month from the date of construction to the date of completion of the project. The condition no.14 of the said allotment letter reads as under:

“The amount of monthly installment, rate of interest to be charged and the total cost of the house/flat can be increased any time without assigning any reasons”.

Also, a Consent Performa was also submitted by the complainant duly signed and filed by the complainant at the time of taking physical possession of the above said flat. The complainant has also executed Hire-Purchase Tenancy Agreement dated 27.03.2016. Further, the cost of flats at Yamunanagar Nagar worked out was valid upto 03.03.2014 and allotment letters were issued by Estate Manager on 31.05.2016. Monthly liability charged by the Estate Manager upto the date of allotment as the interest in the cost is charged up to the date of completion of flats. The Board of HBH vide agenda item no.201.16 dated 11.02.2014 considered and approved amendment in the pricing policy of the Housing Board Haryana. The OPs have demanded an amount of Rs.73,936/- as monthly liability which was fixed by the Board in its meeting held on  11.02.2014. Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.

3.             The learned counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavit as Annexure C-A along with documents Annexure C-1 to C-5 in evidence and closed the evidence by making a separate statement. On the other hand, the Ld. Counsel for the OPs No.1 & 2 has tendered affidavit Annexure R-A alongwith documents Annexure R-1 to R-4 and closed the evidence.

                During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the OPs tenders the copy of letter dated 8/8/2019 issued by Revenue officer (PM), Housing Board Haryana, Panchkula regarding the charging of monthly liability in respect of flats at Yamunanagar. We take the said letter on record as Mark A for the adjudication of the dispute in a proper and fair manner.

4.             We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and gone through the record minutely and carefully.

5.             The factual position such as the floatation of the built up triple stories flat for BPL flat at Yamunanagar vide allotment letter Annexure C-4, offer of possession asking the complainant to take the possession by making the payment as shown in Annexure C-2 and the payment made by the complainant in respect of the said flat vide various receipt Annexure C-3 etc. is not disputed. The grievance of the complainant relates to the amount of Rs.73,936/- allegedly charged by the OPs stating it to be as the interest for delayed payment qua the flat in question. It is contended that the complainant never made any default in making the payment qua the flat in question and thus, OP has no right to charge the interest on delayed payments amounting to Rs.73,936/-.

For proper appreciation of facts as also to look into the grievance of the complainant about charging of Rs. 73,936/-, it is necessary to reproduce the relevant part of allotment letter dated 31.05.2016 (Annexure C-2/R-1) which is as under:-

 

Monthly Liability of 28 months @ Rs. 3211/-            =    89,908/-

Less: Rebate of interest on Rs. 74,000/-                  =    15,972/-

                                                                        ___________

Balance amount                                                      =    73,936/-

                                                                        ___________

 

 From above, it is revealed that a sum of Rs. 89,908/- on account of monthly liability for 28 months at the rate of 3,211/- per month has been charged and further a sum of Rs. 15,972/- as interest on the deposited amount of Rs. 74,000/- has been deducted out of the said amount of Rs. 89,908/-; as such, the demand of remaining amount of Rs. 73,936/- was raised by the OPs. Thus, it is clear that the demand of sum of Rs. 73,936/- was not made on account of delayed payment of installments as alleged by the complainant. On the contrary, the interest, on the deposited amount of Rs. 74,000/-, amounting to Rs. 15,972/- has been paid to the complainant by way of making deductions of said amount from the total payable amount of Rs. 89,908/- by the complainant to the OPs on account of monthly liability for 28 months at the rate of Rs. 3,211/- per month. Hence, the allegations of the complainant that he has been charged a sum of Rs. 73,936/- on account of delayed payment of installments are baseless and meritless being contrary to actual facts.

Though, the complainant has not disputed the power of OPs to increase the price of flats in question but we deem it expedient to discuss the powers of OPs to increase the price of flats in question. In fact, the cost of flats at Yamunanagar as worked out was valid up to 3/3/2014 whereas the final allotment was made on 31/05/2016 i.e. after a period of about 28 months. The factual position in this regard is evident as per ‘Mark A’ which is reproduced as under:-

"No. HBH/CRO(PM)/2019/5011        Dated 08/08/19

To

                   The Estate Manager,

                   Housing Board, Haryana,

                   Panchkula.

 

Sub:             Complaint under Section 12 of the protection Act, 1986.

Ref:             Your office letter No. 2265 Dt. 25.07.2019

The matter regarding charging of monthly liability was sent to CAO Branch and it has been intimated that cost of flats at Yamuna Nagar worked out was valid upto 03.03.2014 and allotment letters were issued by Estate Manager on 31.05.2016. Monthly liability charged by the Estate Manager up to the date of allotment as the interest in the cost is charged up to the date of completion of flats. Copy of agenda item No. 201.16 and its approval is also enclosed herewith.

You are therefore, requested to get the reply prepared from the Advocate and send the same to this office for vetting.

DA/As above.

                                                                                      Sd/-

Revenue Officer(PM)

Housing Board, Haryana

                                                                                Panchkula"

 

As per approval of agenda item no. 201.16 (Annexure R-4 (Colly), the OPs were legally empowered to raise the additional demand up to the date of completion of flats. Moreover, as per Consent Performa Annexure R-2 and Clause(14)(w) of Hire Purchase Agreement (Annexure           R-3), the OPs were empowered to increase the price of flat in question and raise the additional demand from the allottee/complainant by way of charging monthly liability up to the date of completion of flats.

In view of the aforesaid discussion, we find no force and substance in the version of the complainant; hence, the complaint of the complainant deserves to be dismissed and accordingly, the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to cost. A copy of this order shall be forwarded, free of cost, to the parties to the complaint and file be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Announced on:24.01.2022

 

                Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini               Satpal       

                                  Member                        President

 

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

 

                                Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini

Member