DEEPAK MALHOTRA vs ANSAL HOUSING AND CONSTRUCTION LIMITED

IT is good indeed that a complaint pending since year 1993 comes to a happy end because of good counselling done by the Advocates appearing for either side.

COMPLAINT case No. C-221/SC/1993 has been filed by Sri Deepak Malhotra with various allegations against M/s. Ansal Housing & Construction Limited and some of its officers such as its Managing Director etc. who alone are the two opposite parties. Detailed written statement, rejoinder/replication, evidence, affidavits, documents have been filed. The order sheet is too long to be reproduced in toto. The relevant part, however, is that it is on 2.11.2001 that the complainant deposited with the opposite party a sum of Rs. 1,77,643.72 and further in persuance of the demand of some more outstanding amount said to be pending against the complainant, he paid Rs. 11,087.44 on 5.12.2001. In a sense, the outstanding balance was cleared by the complainant only in December, 2001. Normally, therefore, possession should have been handed over by the opposite parties to the complainant as soon as the said payment was made.

Mr. R.K. Gupta appearing for the complainant, Sri Deepak Malhotra as well as Sri Deepak Malhotra insisted upon a decree for interest amount on the total sum of Rs. 4,73,731.16 proportionately with effect from individual deposits made beginning with the first instalment paid and the last one paid in December, 2001. Mr. Anil Kumar appearing for the respondents wanted to argue that interest amount is not payable even after December, 2001 because possession could not be delivered on account of objections of Lucknow Development Authority to permit execution of the registered sale deed.

THE order sheet indicates that at one point of time, a direction was issued to the Lucknow Development Authority to file affidavit indicating reasons why further stamp duty was being demanded and even if some interest amount was called by the builders from the allottee, what was the basis of demanding or charging stamp duty on the said amount. Affidavit has been filed which is on the record. Coming to the only issue now as to how and why the possession should not be made available to the allottee waiting since 1998 for their accommodation which was promised to be provided by the opposite parties to the complainant be made available to him forthwith and how the registered sale deed may be permitted to be executed.

COMING to the first issue it is good that Mr. Anil Kumar left the matter to the discretion of the Commission as to the interest amount payable for the period December, 2001 up-to-date which means the date on which the possession is going to be handed over to the complainant by the opposite parties. Mr. R.K. Gupta as well as Sri Deepak Malhotra also left it to the Commission though they would have been perhaps happy if a heavier amount than what is proposed was directed to be paid to them. On over-all consideration of the facts and circumstances, a lump-sum amount of Rs. 75,000/- is held payable as interest/compensation to the complainant within 15 days from today. No other claim will thereafter survive entitling Sri Deepak Malhotra to any further amount from M/s. Ansal Housing & Construction Limited, opposite parties in the instant complaint. Like-wise no amount in any manner whatsoever would be climable or demandable by M/s. Ansal Housing & Construction Limited, opposite parties in the complaint from the complainant, Sri Deepak Malhotra. The said amount of Rs. 75,000/- settles all the inter-se claim between those parties. Within 15 days the possession of House No. N-199 Old/New N-491, Aashiana, Lucknow shall be handed over. The house shall be distempered/painted and all necessary repairs shall be carried out within 15 days allowed and if some work in that regard remains pending, it may be done in another 15 days. The electric and water charges under the law shall be payable by the complainant with effect from the date he enters possession.

THE Lucknow Development Authority shall execute the registered lease deed in favour of the complainant within one month of the date of taking possession without insisting or demanding any further stamp duty on the sum of Rs. 75,000/- which has been directed above to be paid by way of compensation for the delayed possession made available to the complainant. THE complaint, thus, stands finally disposed of with the directions noted above. Since the complaint ends with a happy note, let the parties bear their own costs. Let copy of this order be made available to the parties. Complaint disposed of.