GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THROUGH ITS VICE CHAIRMAN vs PARAMJEET GAIND

THIS is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 23.7.1999 passed by District Consumer Forum, Ghaziabad in Complaint Case No. 695/1997.

THE facts of the case stated in brief are that the complainant applied for allotment of a flat in double storey building in the Govindpuram Housing Scheme for lower income group. THE flat was originally valued at Rs. 32,000/- and the possession was to be given in two years. Ghaziabad Development Authority without the consent of the complainant increased the height of the flat and converted it to three storey building and enhanced the cost to Rs. 90,000/-. On account of the increase in price, the complainant refused to take the house as the same was beyond his paying capacity. The opposite party, Ghaziabad Development Authority, has alleged that the initial price was indicated as Rs. 32,000/- which was only a tentative cost. The period of two years was also tentative but when the construction work was completed, the cost was increased to Rs. 80,900/-. The double storey building was raised to three storey keeping in view the public interest. As the complainant has refused to take the flat the amount can be refunded after deductions.

Learned District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the Ghaziabad Development Authority to pay the deposited amount alongwith 18% per annum interest. A sum of Rs. 2,000/- was allowed as compensation and Rs. 200/- as cost of the proceedings.

AGGRIEVED against the order of the learned District Forum, Ghaziabad Development Authority, 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 appellant at the admission stage without issuing notice to the opposite party.

LEARNED Counsel for the appellant has argued that the interest of 18% per annum is very much on the higher side. The interest cannot be on the higher side as the National Commission has also allowed interest at the rate of 18% per annum in the case of George Thomas & Ors. v. Ghaziabad Development Authority, I (1999) CPJ 18 (NC). It is further argued that the price has been increased to Rs. 80,900/- on the ground that one more room has been added and better finishing has been given to the house. It may be stated that the houses were made for the lower income group and they require this house for their living. They require a simple house for their day-to-day living. These persons cannot live with lavishness and hence they do not need a better finishing. Thus we find that there was deficiency on the part of the Development Authority. Thus the complainant is within his right to refuse to take the possession of the house as it was impossible for him to pay the amount. The appeal is, therefore, liable to be dismissed. Order The appeal dismissed. The judgment and order of the learned District Forum are confirmed. There will be no order as to the cost. Let copy be made available to the parties as per rules. Appeal dismissed.