PRAHLAD NARAIN MATHUR vs RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD

UN disputed facts are that although initially the complainant has got himself registered under Kalpatru Scheme of the Rajasthan Housing Boardtion under Parijat Self Financing Scheme, 1988 floated by the Housing Board. UNder that Scheme allotment of house is assured within two years. Reservation letter was issued infavour of the complainant on 10.11.89 reserving a MIG A cate gory house infavour of the complainant at Sanganer. The complainant was required to de posit the approximate cost of the house by 4 six monthly instalments. The first instalment was to be deposited on 8.1.90 and the last instalment on 8.7.91. The complainant had deposited all the 4 instalments in time, but there was delay in allotment of house to the complainant. It was only on 28.2.94 that the Rajasthan Housing Board issued an allotment letter in favour of the complainant allotting to him house No. 83/202 in Sanganer Scheme. After giving credit to the instalments which the complainant had deposited in pursuance of the reservation letter dated 10.11.89 and interest thereon @ 6% per annum, the complainant was further required to deposit an amount of Rs. 1,20,202/ towards the cost of the house. According to the complainant, this cost is excessive, it is stated that cost which was in force in 1989 should have been levied. It is also stated that despite assurance for allotment of the house within two years given by the Parijat Self Financing Scheme, the allotment of the house has been made with great delay of about two years and three months. This has led to the increase in the cost of the house and the complainant has suffered loss. It is also stated by the complainant that he had to bear rent of the rented house on account of the delayed allotment of the house. The complainant has further claimed an amount of Rs. 4 lacs as compensation for mental distress and agony.

LATELY, the National Commission in First Appeal No. 620/94 (Rajasthan Housing Board v. R.C. Bhandari decided on 14.1.97=I (1997) CPJ 27 (NC) has held that grant of interest at the rate of 15% for the period commencing from 1.4.90 and 30.4.92 in that case was against the contractual stipulation contained in para 6.5 of the Scheme in which it is clearly mentioned that in case the did not deliver the pos session of the house after construction within two years, it shall pay interest @ 6% p.a. commencing from after the expiry of two years till the delayed date for delivery of possession. The National Commission, therefore, held that the complainant was entitled to interest @ 6% p.a. We are bound by this decision of the National Commission. From the allotment letter it appears that the Housing Board has already given to the complainant an amount of Rs. 12,709.50 as interest on the instalment amounts deposited by the complainant @ 6% p.a. Thus the Opposite Party has already fulfilled its contractual stipulation of paying interest @ 6% p.a. commencing from the date after the expiry of two years till the delayed allotment. Consequently, the complainant is not entitled to interest for the delayed period at a rate more than 6% p.a. as held by the National Com mission. This is one aspect of the matter.

The other aspect of the matter is that there was deficiency in service on the part of the Rajasthan Housing Board in not making allotment within the assured period of two years. If the complainant has suffered any economic loss on account of this delay, this State Commission is quite competent to award compensation to the complainant for delayed allotment of the house. Clearly in this case there had been delay of two years and three months in the allotment of the house by the Rajasthan Housing Board. An applicant parts with his money under the hope and on the basis of the assurance that he will get the Self Financed house within the stipulated period of two years. It is, therefore, the obligation of the Housing Board to allot houses under the Self Financing Scheme within the stipulated period of two years. If a delay to the extent of two years and three months takes place beyond the stipulated period of two years, naturally the registered applicant suffers economic loss. He cannot occupy the house, which he had booked with the Housing Board and he has to live in a rented house and bear the burden of rent. Economic loss, therefore, undoubtedly occurs in case of delayed allotment by the Housing Board. For this undue delay of two years and three months it is proper to award to the complainant compensation under Section 14(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. We, therefore, award to the complainant a compensation of Rs. 30,000/ as against the Rajasthan Housing Board for the delayed allotment.

IT appears that the complainant has not taken possession of the house allotted to him by allotment letter dated 28.2.94 for the reason that he had to deposit an amount of Rs. 1,20,202/ with the Housing Board before taking the pos session. IT is the option of the complainant to take possession of the allotted house or not as per rules of the Rajasthan Housing Board. We cannot pass an order for delivery of possession of the allotted house on the same terms and conditions as mentioned in the allotment letter dated 28.2.94. We do not know if the Housing Board charges interest for delayed payment of amount required to be deposited by the allotment letter. Before parting with this order we may observe that again and again tendency has developed to file complaints before the State Commission although as a matter of fact the value of the house as claimed is even below 5 lacs. We have deprecated this practice again and again but it is repeated. It is made clear in future any complaint is filed by exaggerating the valuation the complaint will be thrown out on that ground by this State Commission.

WE, therefore, partly allow this com plaint and direct the Opposite Party to pay to the complainant a compensation of Rs. 30,000/ .It is the option of the complainant either to claim the amount deposited by him with permissible interest from the Opposite Party or to take delivery of the allotted house in accordance with the Scheme and rules of the Housing Board. Complaint partly allowed.