GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs SUJIT KUMAR SIRCAR

THIS is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 30.3.1994 passed by District Consumer Forum, Ghaziabad in Complaint Case No. 1150/1993.

THE facts of the case stated in brief are that the complainant applied for a plot in Govindpuram Housing Scheme in the year 1988. THE plot as reserved in October, 1988. THE allotment was made on 10.2.1989 of a 200 sq. mts. plot. THE price of this plot which was intimated by the Ghaziabad Development Authority was also deposited by the complainant, but in spite of the deposit of the amount, the complainant has not been given possession of the house within two years. THE complainant has prayed for interest at the rate of 18% per annum alongwith compensation till the delivery of possession. The opposite party in the written version has alleged that the possession which was to be given in two years'' time was only tentative. There was a stay order from the Hon''ble High Court on account of which there was delay in development of the property.

Learned District Forum after considering the case of the parties directed the Ghaziabad Development Authority to hand over possession of the plot by 1st April, 1994. It also directed to pay 18% per annum interest on the deposited amount which has to be paid from 1st September, 1991 to 31st March, 1994. It also directed that the interest on the amount deposited shall be paid after 1st April, 1994 on quarterly basis.

AGGRIEVED against the order of the learned District Forum, Ghaziabad Development Authority has come in appeal and has challenged the correctness of the order. We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant.

LEARNED Counsel for the appellant has argued that the price which was intimated was tentative and the costing was to be done after completion of the development work. According to learned District Forum after the deposit of the amount, allottee is entitled to get possession of the house within a period of two years as indicated in the brochure. The learned District Forum has given six months'' grace period as has been held by this Commission in such cases. The District Forum has, therefore, allowed interest from 1st September, 1994 on the amount deposited by the complainant. The learned District Forum considered the case of the appellant that there had been stay order in the litigation between Ghaziabad Development Authority and the farmers. It also held that Ghaziabad Development Authority has not intimated the fact of stay order to the allottee and hence it cannot take this plea. As this intimation was not given, therefore, the interest was allowed from 1.9.1994 to 31.3.1994. In view of the fact that the Ghaziabad Development Authority has not intimated about the existence of stay order to the allottee, it therefore, cannot take shelter behind this stay order. If this fact had been intimated to the allottee, the allottee might have taken the amount which he had deposited instead of waiting for such a long period. Therefore, in view of these facts the order of the learned District Forum is perfectly right and the interest allowed for 1st September, 1994 cannot be said to be unjustified. The appeal is, therefore, liable to be dismissed. Order The appeal is dismissed and the judgment and order of the learned District Forum are confirmed. Let compliance of the order be made within a period of six weeks from the date of this order. Let copy as per rules be made available to the parties. Appeal dismissed.