DEVI PRASAD SRIVASTAVA vs HOUSING COMMISSIONER, U.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD

THIS is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 16.6.1997 passed by District Consumer Forum, Lucknow in Complaint Case No. 205/1995.

THE facts of the case stated in brief are that a house was allotted to the complainant on 29.1.1980. THE entire amount representing the cost of the house was demanded to be deposited within 15 days and to intimate the same within the same period. This letter was received by the complainant on 7.2.1980. On 11.2.1980 the complainant wrote a letter that he wants to take loan from his department for construction of the house. Hence he may be given a No Objection Certificate. As the amount was not deposited within the time, the opposite party U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad cancelled the allotment on the ground that the amount has not been deposited within the time allowed. THE order was passed for refund of the amount deposited by the complainant after deducting 20% amount. The opposite party has alleged that as the complainant did not deposit the entire amount as demanded, therefore, the allotment was cancelled. It is further alleged that the complainant filed another Complaint No. 25/1989 which was dismissed on 28.4.1989. According to the complainant this complaint was not filed by him.

The learned District Forum after going through the evidence of the case came to the conclusion that the second complaint is not maintainable and hence it dismissed the complaint.

AGGRIEVED against the order of the learned District Forum, the complainant has come in appeal and has challenged the correctness of the order passed by the District Forum. We have heard the learned Counsel for the respondent and the complainant who was present in person.

THE complainant has argued that for obtaining loan from his department, No Objection Certificate was sought for which was not supplied. According to learned Counsel for the opposite party when the amount was not deposited within the time allowed by Avas Evam Vikas Parishad, the allotment order had to be cancelled and as such the State Commission should not interfere in the order. It is an admitted fact that the amount was to be deposited within the time asked for by the Avas Vikas Parishad. When the amount was not deposited the allotment order was cancelled. It was not the outlook of the Avas Vikas Parishad whether the amount to be deposited is to be taken on loan from the Government or not. If the complainant had no ready money for payment as required by the Avas Vikas Parishad, then he should not have applied for allotment of a house in such a scheme in which the entire amount is demanded within 15 days of the allotment. THE complainant should have opted for a scheme which requires payment in a longer period. Thus the fault lies with the complainant in not depositing the amount in time with the U.P. Avas Vikas Parishad. The next argument of the learned Counsel for the U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad is that the second complaint is barred by principles of res judicata because a Complaint No. 25/1989 was filed by the complainant on the same facts which was dismissed on 28.4.1989. The contention of complainant that he did not file this complaint cannot be accepted. It is the case of the complainant that somebody else in order to harm the complainant had filed that complaint. Thus even on this ground the complaint was rightly dismissed by the learned District Forum. We find that this appeal has no force and is liable to be dismissed. Order The appeal is dismissed and the judgment and order of the learned District Forum are confirmed. There will be no order as to the cost. Let copy as per rules be made available to the parties. Appeal dismissed.