SURENDER MOHAN SUNEJA vs Himachal Pradesh Housing Board

THIS appeal has been filed by the complainant against the order of the District Forum dated 7.10.91.

BRIEFLY the facts are that the respondent under-took to construct flats in housing colony at Sanjauli (Simla) under hire purchase scheme. The complainant applied for allotment of one flat and paid Rs. 5,000/- on 15.5.86. On 25.7.89 he was informed by the respondent that the allotment of the said flat would be made on 29.8.89 in the office of the Estate Manager of the Himachal Pradesh Housing Board. (Hereinafter referred to as the Board). He was also informed that the tentative cost of the flat was Rs. 65,000/-. He was allotted flat No. D/l in Block 11, and its selling price was communicated as Rs. 65,000/-. It is alleged that there was no escalation clause in the advertisement made by the respondent and in the absence of escalation clause the respondent cannot escalate the price from Rs. 65,000/- to Rs. 85,000/-. He also pleads that he was entitled to interest on the deposit made by him with the respondent. The complaint was contested by the respondent. It was inter-alia pleaded by them that the respondent was entitled to the price which has been paid by the complainant. It was further pleaded that the cost of Rs. 65,000/- was tentative cost and the final cost was to be determined after the construction of the flat.

The learned District Forum held that the Board did not over charge the price. Consequently it dismissed the complaint. The complainant has come up in appeal against the said order of the Commission.

THE first contention of the learned Counsel for the complainant is that the additional affidavit was filed by Mr. J.R. Kanith, Secretary-cum-Chief Engineer of the Board, wherein he gave the breakup of the price as follows : - (i)Construction cost of flat Rs. 56,647.00 (ii)Interest for half the const. period (9/85 to 4/89) i.e. 1 year 9 months @ 12% Rs. 11,896.00 (iii)Cost of developed land on plinth area basis @ 333/- per sqm. 26.90 sqm. Rs. 8,958.00 (iv)10% unforeseen 1 uncovered Charges Rs. 7,750.00 Total : Rs. 85,252.00 Say Rs. 85,000.00 He submits that 10% unforeseen 1 uncovered charges (shown at item No. iv above) cannot be charged, as after the completion of the flat exact price had been worked out. We find force in the contention of the learned Counsel for the complainant. The Chief Engineer has given the exact price of the flat on the basis of the expenses incurred by it. He can not be allowed to add 10% unforeseen/uncovered expenses after the flat had been completed and exact price worked out by him. Therefore, we are of the view that the respondent Board can charge only Rs. 77,502/- on account of cost of the flat.

THE second contention of the learned Counsel for the complainant is that the complainant is entitled to interest on the amount of Rs. 5,000/- deposited by him from the date of deposit till the date when the flat was allotted to him. We have considered the arguments by the complainant. THE amount of Rs. 5,000/- was deposited by the complainant on 15.5.86. THE tentative date of the completion of the flat was 31.12.87. THE allotment of flat was made on 29.8.89 i.e. after about one year and 8 months of the tentative date of the completion of the flat. No explanation has been given by the respondent for the delay in construction of the flat. In the circumstances in our view the complainant is entitled to interest on his deposits of Rs. 5,000/- from 1.1.88 till 29.8.89, when the flat was allotted to him. THE rates of interest have gone very high. We therefore, grant interest to the appellant @ 15% p.a. on the amount of Rs. 5,000/- for 1 year 7 months and 29 days. THE interest comes to Rs. 1,245/-. For the aforesaid reasons we partly accept the appeal with cost and direct the respondent to pay Rs. 8,995/- with interest @ 15% p.a. from the date of institution of the complaint till the date of payment within a period of 3 months to the respondent. Cost Rs. 500/-. Appeal partly allowed.