RESIDENT ENGINEER, RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD vs SANTOSH KUMAR AHLUWALIA

ADMITTED facts in this appeal filed'' by the opposite parties are that the complainant-respondent had got himself registered for allotment of M.I.G. category ''B'' house at Ganganagar in the year 1982 after depositing registration charges of Rs. 4,600/-. Later on, on 2.4.90 the complainant made an application to the Resident Engineer, Rajasthan Housing Board, Bikaner that he wanted to get his registration converted to a house of H.I.G. category and to transfer his registration from Ganganagar to Hanumangarh. He further intimated that he wanted to have a house at Hanumangarh on complete payment of the price and further that he was prepared to deposit additional amount required for the house. Upon the aforesaid application of the complainant, the Project Engineer, Rajasthan Housing Board, Hanumangarh sent a letter dated 4.4.90 to the complainant informing him that on deposit by the complainant the additional registration amount of Rs. 12,500/- and the amount of first and second instalment on seed money amounting to Rs. 30,000/-, in all Rs. 42,500/-, the complainant will be allotted a Higher Income Category house in Hanumangarh Town. The complainant had already deposited Rs 4,600/- as registration charges of M.I.G. B. category at Ganganagar on 28.12.1982. It was instructed by the Project Engineer that the complainant may deposit the above amount immediately so that the house may be allotted to the complainant. The complainant deposited the amount of Rs. 37,900/- depositable by him after adjusting the registration charges of Rs. 4,600/- on 21.12.90. Thereafter the Rajasthan Housing Board, Bikaner had issued an allotment letter dated 30.3.91 allotting HIG category house No. 8/413 to the complainant. By this allotment letter dated 30.3.91 the complainant was required to deposit the balance amount of Rs. 1,05,928/- in respect of the cost of the house and construction within three months. This amount of Rs. 1,05,928/- was worked out after giving credit to the initial payments made and adding the registration charges. The complainant deposited the amount of Rs. 1,05,928/- on 27.6.91. It was the case of the complainant that despite that possession of the allotted house was not given to him.

THIS being the actual position, it will not lie in the mouth of the Rajasthan Housing Board, Bikaner to muster the courage to state that allotment of the house could only be made after obtaining approval from Administrative Officer of the Board at Jodhpur and further to plead that registration for the house in favour of the complainant was not transferred from Ganganagar to Hanumangarh Town. On 4.4.90 the complainant was required to deposit an amount of Rs. 37,900/- immediately so that a H.I.G. category house at Hanumangarh may be allotted to him and after deposit having been made, the office of the Rajasthan Housing Board at Bikaner issued an allotment letter on 30.3.91 allotting house No. 8/413 and required the complainant to deposit the cost of the land and cost of construction amounting to Rs. 1,05,928/- and after having accepted the amount, to defraud the complainant to this extent that even the conversion of the place from Ganganagar to Hanumangarh and the allotment of the house by the Board was sought to be given a go-bye by making a denial of the approval of the transfer of conversion of place by the Board. Such malafide conduct on behalf of a public body, like the Rajasthan Housing Board is least expected. The District Forum, Ganganagar was more than right in allowing the complaint.

During the course of arguments, it was accepted by the complainant-respondent and his Counsel that after the decision of the District Forum, possession of the house has been given to the complainant by the appellants on 11.3.93 on the same price. Consequently, now it is not necessary to retain the order of the District Forum directing the opposite parties-appellants to deliver the possession of the house. The only thing survives is the interest awarded by the District Forum @ 18% per annum to the complainant from 27.6.91 till possession is delivered. We are of the opinion that interest should be awarded @ 15% per annum instead of @ 18% per annum. The complainant was clearly entitled to interest @ 15% per annum for unjustified and unwarranted delay in delivering possession of the house to the complainant despite the issue of the allotment letter and deposit of the amount demanded therein by the complainant on 27.6.91. The District Forum has further awarded to the complainant Rs. 1,000/- as costs and Rs.1,100/- as Counsel''s charges. They are quite reasonable. For delay in delivering the possession of the house, the complainant is entitled to interest @ 15% per annum.

CONSEQUENTLY we partly allow this appeal and delete the order for the delivery of the possession of the house since possession has already been delivered. The appellants will pay to the complainant interest @ 15% per annum on the total amount deposited by the complainant with the Housing Board upto 27.6.91 from the said date till the date of delivery of possession. The order of the District Forum awarding Rs. 1,000/- as costs and Rs. 1,100/- as Counsel''s charges is maintained. Appeal partly allowed. ________________