This case is coming for final hearing on 09-06-2014 in the presence of Complainant in person and M/s.TVSK Kanakaraju, Advocate for Opposite Parties and having stood over till this date, the Forum delivered the following.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

: O R D E R :

(As per Sri V.V.L.Narasimha Rao, Honourable Member on behalf of the Bench)

1. The complainant filed the present complaint against the Opposite parties on 30.10.2012 under Sec.12 of Consumer Protection Act and requesting the Forum to direct the Opposite parties to refund Rs.5,000/- which was deposited for purchasing Flat with the Opposite parties along with interest and Legal expenses of Rs.10,000/-.

2. The brief facts are as follows: The complainant submits that the Opposite party gave wide publication in the month of March, 2007 for selling the flats of the middle class people under name and style of Rajiv Swagruha scheme. Basing upon that publication petitioner has paid Rs.5,000/- towards deposit amount by purchasing the application form for Rs.250/- in E-seva office. The Petitioner opted for the flat admeasuring 685.50 sft. Thereupon on 29.06.2007, the said application was confirmed on verification of 3^rd party. Again on 16.8.2007 3^rd party verification has been conducted upon the complainant’s application. Thereupon the Opposite parties sent proceedings dt.15.12.2008 stating that the flats admeasuring 755 Sft in Yendada (Adraja) township which will be constructed in G+13 construction pattern. For the said flat Rs.16.60 lacs is the tentative cost and the complainant has to pay 25% initially and thereafter 75% has to be paid in 4 stages in various denominations. The Opposite parties also assured that if any person who pays Rs.25,000/- in advance top priority will be given for the persons by way of Lottery system. After receiving the letter dt. 15.12.2008, the complainant submitted a letter to the Opposite parties stating that, earlier while giving the paper publication the Opposite parties assured that the flats will be allotted to the middle class people which will be 25% lesser than the market value. Now observing the letter dt.15.12.2008 as the complainant could not afford the same and also the Flat measurements are as 755 Sft. He submitted another letter dt. 27.12.2008 to refund the deposit amount, but Opposite parties did not responded. Thereafter on 4.2.2010 again complainant requested the Opposite parties to refund the deposit amount of Rs.5,000/- along with interest. Later on 23.10.2010 they have sent letter to the complainant stating that in the ADRAJA Proejct, the allottees has to pay Rs.25,000/- within 15 days otherwise, if they are not interested, the said deposit amount of Rs.5000/- will be forfeited. The said letter was received by the complainant on 3.11.2010. Again on 8.11.2010 the complainant submitted another letter for refund f deposit amount and further there is no response from the Opposite parties. Thereupon having vexed with the attitude of the Opposite party on 26.09.20102, the complainant has submitted letter to the Chairman and Managing Director, A.P.Rajeev Swagruha Corporation for refund of Rs.5,000/- along with interest. Even for that letter also there is no reply from the Opposite parties and hence alleging deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite party the complainant has filed the present complaint seeking reliefs.

3. Notice served to the Opposite parties.

4. On behalf of the Opposite parties M/s.TVSK Kanaka Raju, Advocates filed Vakalatnama and filed the counter as follows: The Opposite parties has launched the construction project for the benefit of the middle class people in affordable price. It is a self financing project without any profit and loss. If the customers are allowed to leave and withdraw from the purchase of the scheme all of sudden the projects will collapse. As they are meant only for the benefit of the middle class range people. The Opposite parties are not disputing about the payment of Rs.5,000/- paid to the Opposite parties on 9.4.2007. After receiving the said deposit and the application and after confirmation by the 3^rd party the complainant’s application was confirmed. The Opposite parties served a letter to complainant dt.15.12.2008 for allotting the flat which was fixed @ Rs.16.6 Lakhs tentative rate to the Flat admeasuring about 755 Sq.ft and initial deposit of Rs.25,000/- has to be paid and thereafter 25% of the flat must be paid within 90 days. The said balance amount of 75% must be paid as per the terms and conditions mentioned in 15.12.2008. The complainant is well aware of the terms and conditions, he has suppressed the actual facts and filed the present complaint against the Opposite parties. The complainant is well aware with regard to the refund of amounts paid by the customers subject to the policy of the Opposite party scheme. The complainant did not choose to make payment of Rs.25,000/- even after receiving the letter dt.15.12.2008. Thereafter as per the resolution dt. 27.7.2010 basing upon terms, if any amount is deducted from the payments any amount has to be refunded 10% of the flat cost will be deducted by the payment made by the complainant that took who had opted for the cancellation of the allotment. Even after intimating the said terms and conditions to the complainant, he did not came forward to pay Rs.25,000/- advance within 15 days as intimated to him and that too complainant has accepted for the terms of the 1^st Opposite party. After 3^rd party verification and signed in the application. Hence as there is no deficiency on the part of Opposite parties, the complaint is liable to be dismissed and also the complaint is not entitled for refund of amounts from the Opposite parties.

5. The complainant filed his chief examination affidavit and on his part Ex.A1 to A9 were marked. On behalf of the Opposite parties Sri C.Mutyala Rao in the capacity of General Manager, Projects of Opposite parties filed Evidence Affidavit reiterating the averments mentioned in the counter and on behalf of Opposite parties no documents filed.

6. Now on observing the entire pleadings and documents of both sides District Forum framed the following points for consideration:

   1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of Opposite party

   2. To what relief complainant is entitled

7. The complainant submitted his oral arguments and Opposite parties submitted their Written Arguments as well as oral arguments.

8. Point No.1: The present complaint is filed by the complainant against the Opposite parties for refund of Rs.5,000/- which was paid by him towards deposit for the flat to be constructed by the Opposite parties in Rajeev Swagruha Scheme as the Opposite parties has not followed the terms and conditions mentioned in the paper cuttings dt.25.3.2007 in Eenadu paper that the flats will be available to the middle class people by the Opposite parties with the 25% lesser than the market value. Hence as he is not in a position to afford the said amount to purchase the said flat as per letter dt. 15.12.2008 he requested the Opposite parties to refund the amount along with interest.

9. In the counter, the Opposite parties stated that the complainant having admitted in the application and terms and conditions for purchasing the flat, when he was interested to pay the said flat and paid the advance amount and also having not paid the Rs.25,000/- advance even after receiving Letter dt.15.12.2008 and 23.10.2010, as he has violated the terms and conditions, he is not entitled for the refund of the amount.

10. Ex.A2 is the application form along with terms and conditions. In terms and conditions (Page No.8) as per Clause 5, the deposit amount for Municipal Corporation limit is Rs.5,000/- or elsewhere it is Rs.3,000/- only. Even observing in the Ex.A9 paper cutting dt. 25.3.2007 also it was mentioned that the application charges Rs.250/- + Rs.500/- deposit in Municipal corporation areas. As per Cl.6 of Ex.A2, Allottee has to contribute 25% of cost of Flat and plan of Flat for 685.50 Sq.ft is mentioned. Ex.A1 is the Receipt of the e-seva, Government of Andhra Pradesh, for Rs.5,000/- which was mentioned as Processing fee. Ex.A3 is the letter dt.15.12.2008 issued by the Opposite parties to the complainant referring his application No.1086003074 (mentioned in Ex.A2) stating, the flat for Plinth Area 755 sft will be allotted to meet under G+13 floors with tentative cost of Rs.16.60 lakhs which will come under the purview of the Income range between Rs.10,000/- to Rs.15,000/- per month. In the said letter as per Cl.5(a) advance amount of Rs.25,000/- shall be paid within 15 days from the date of receipt of this letter and 25% of the tentative cost out of Rs.16.60 lakhs has paid and thereof the balance 75% has to be paid in four stages in 4 denominations. As per the Clause-5 of terms and conditions of allotment, the person who pays the 25% of the cost for the flat will be given top priority for the lottery system to allot the plot. As per Clause-9, it shows that membership to the club will be charged separately. As per Annexure-I those who want to purchase the flat can avail the bank loan. Ex.A4 is the letter submitted by the complainant to the Opposite parties stating that as per Ex.A9, earlier they have promised to sanction the flats for 685 sq.yds that too with 25% lesser rates compared to the market value at that time. Hence as the proposal sent by the Opposite parties vide Ex.A3 dt.15.12.2008, since he has not in a position to effort the same and also not in a position to pay the excess amount he requested the Opposite parties to reduce 25% of the cost of the flat as mentioned in Ex.A3. Otherwise the deposit amount of Rs.5,000/- has to be refunded to him along with interest. Ex.A5 is the letter submitted to the Opposite parties for refund of Rs.5,000/- to him along with interest. Ex.A6 is the letter given by the Opposite party dt.23.10.2010 i.e. cancellation order for cancelling the allotment of the flat to the complainant i.e. vide complainant’s application No.1076003074 as even after the intimation given to the complainant he could not pay the initial amount of Rs.25,000/- advance amount within 15 days after receiving Ex.A3. This allotment is acknowledged by forfeit the registration fees. The said Ex.A6 was served to the complainant to his house address vide house No.64-9-6, Ramnagar, Sriharipuram, Malkapuram Post, Visakhapatnam and the same address was mentioned in the complaint by the complainant. Ex.A7 is the request letter dt. 8.11.2010 served to the Opposite parties for refund of Rs.5,000/- along with interest. Ex.A8 is the letter served to the Opposite parties dt. 26.09.2012 demanding the Opposite parties for refund of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant. Ex.A8 is the newspaper cutting dt. 25.03.2007 cited in Eenadu paper in which it was stated that the middle class people were purchasing the flats with the rates fixed below the 25% of the market rate and the applications will be received from all the E-seva centres. In that paper cuttings the customers who are interested has to purchase application for Rs.250/- and shall pay Rs.5,000/- deposit in the Municipal Corporation area and Rs.3,000/- in Municipality areas. In the similar manner observing the same paper cutting, the complainant paid Rs.5,000/- to the Opposite parties vide Ex.A1.

11. Now coming to the point with regard to the deficiency of service as seen from Ex.A2, application when the complainant having admitted for the terms and conditions in the application purchased by him and paid the amount of Rs.5,000/- vide Ex.A1 to the Opposite party, he has to abide the terms and conditions in the Page 2 of the Ex.A2, i.e. (in para No.3) it was mentioned as “I also undertake to deposit 25% allotment of cost from my own resources”. In para No.4 it was mentioned as “the above information given by me is true and correct if any of the information found to be untrue my registration and allotment can be cancelled without any prior notice and the deposit paid to the A.P.Housing Board can be forfeited. I agree to abide by the rules of the A.P. Housing Board and the terms and conditions to be signed as given by the A.P. Housing Board in the application form”. In para 6 it was mentioned as he is agreeing for the aforesaid terms and conditions. In page No.5 of the Ex.A2, the complainant's income source is mentioned as Rs.10,850/- per month who is working as Works Contractor. The address mentioned in Ex.A2 application and in Ex.A3, Ex.A6 when comparing to the address mentioned in the complaint are same. After receiving the Ex.A3 letter dt. 15.12.2008 from the Opposite parties for allotment of 755 Sft flat i.e. 2 Bed Roomed as admitted in Ex.A2 application he has to pay 25% of the tentative cost of the flat and also he has to pay Rs.25,000/- advance amount within 15 days from the date of receipt of Ex.A3.

12. On perusal of Ex.A2, A3 and A1 it reveals that the complainant has deposited Rs.5,000/- to the Opposite parties for purchase of the flat from Opposite parties. In the Ex.A4, he himself admitted that he is not affordable for purchasing the flat admeasuring about 755 Sq.ft, as mentioned in Ex.A3 dt. 15.12.2008 and hence he requested for refund of the amount along with interest. In the similar manner he is continuously requesting the Opposite parties for refund of the amount vide Ex.A5, A4, A8.

13. On perusal of the income source mentioned by the complainant in Page No.5 of A2 it shows that he is a middle class person earning about Rs.10,850/- per month. As seen from the income range mentioned in Ex.A3 vide letter dt. 15.02.2008, the person who wants to purchase the flat admeasuring 755 sft must be within income range of Rs.10,000/- to Rs.15,000/-. After receiving the Ex.A3 Letter he responded immediately on 27.12.2008 for refund of the amount along with interest as he is not affordable for purchasing the flat from Opposite parties. There are some differences in the measurements of Flat, when comparing to the Ex.A9/paper cutting given by Government of A.P., dt. 25.03.2007 and comparing to the Ex.A3 application.

14. Even in the counter vide Para No.5 and Evidence Affidavit as per para No.5, the Opposite parties admitted that the persons who opt for cancellation of the flat according to the 10% of the flat cost will be deducted from the payments made by the complainant.

15. Here in this case on hand the complainant has paid an amount of  Rs.5,000/- towards deposit on 9.4.2007 vide Ex.A1 and still he has to pay the further amount as mentioned in Ex.A3 letter dt. 15.12.2008. But when comparing to the measurements of the flat opted by the complainant in Ex.A2 along with ExA9 and in Ex.A3 the measurements are different in Ex.A3. The complainant opted for 685.50 sft in Ex.A2, the Opposite party offered for 755 sft vide Ex.A3. So we conclude that the submission of return of Rs.5,000/- is reasonable, as he could not afford the total tentative cost of Rs.16,60,000/- for the said 755 Sft. Flat and there is deficiency of service on part of the Opposite parties 1 and 2.

16. In the light of facts and observing the Ex.A2, A1 (payment receipt for Rs.5,000/- dt. 9.4.2007) along with Ex.A9, A3 and the admission of Opposite parties in Para No.5 of Counter and Evidence Affidavit, we conclude that the complainant is entitled for refund of Rs.4,500/- only i.e. after deducting 10% of the amount of Rs.500/- as admitted by the Opposite parties from the amount of Rs.5,000/- paid by the complainant vide Ex.A1. As the Opposite parties are runned by the organization of Government of Andhra Pradesh viewing the circumstance of interest is not awarded to the complainant and also if the compensation is also awarded it will be difficult to the government in the present circumstances. Accordingly points No.1 & 2 are answered in favour of complainant.

17. In the result the Opposite parties are directed to refund Rs.4,500/- (Rupees Four thousand five hundred only) to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this Order. No order to costs.

Dictated to the Shorthand Writer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 20^th day of June, 2014.

       Sd/-                                                                         Sd/-

President (FAC)                                                         Member           

                                                                        District Consumer Forum-I

                                                                            Visakhapatnam

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Exhibits Marked for the Complainant:

Exhibits Marked for the Opposite Parties:

- NIL -

         Sd/-                                                                       Sd/-

President (FAC)                                                         Member           

                                                                        District Consumer Forum-I

                                                                            Visakhapatnam