CHANDIGARH HOUSING BOARD Vs. MADAN LAL GARG S/O SOHAN LAL
LAWS(HPCDRC)-2010-9-17
HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on September 15,2010

CHANDIGARH HOUSING BOARD Appellant
VERSUS
Madan Lal Garg S/O Sohan Lal Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) WHEN this appeal came up for admission on 14.6.2010, then looking into the controversy involved in it, following order was passed: - 14.6.2010. Present: Mr. V.B. Verma, Advocate for the appellant. M.A. No.370/2010. Heard Mr. Verma. Issue notice of this application to the respondent to show cause why delay in filing the appeal be not condoned and then main matter taken up for consideration. Notice will be made returnable for 26.7.2010. For this date notice in the appeal as well as in MA No.369/2010 will also be issued to the respondent. Send for the records. Since entire amount has been deposited, execution and operation of order dated 21.1.2010 passed by Distt. Forum Sirmaur at Nahan in Consumer Complaint No.125/2008 will remain stayed. It is clarified that in the event of delay being condoned, the matter will be finally heard and disposed of at the admission stage looking to the nature of controversy involved in this appeal. While issuing notice to respondent through registered post, copy of this order will be attached by the office. Amount tendered with this appeal shall be invested with UCO Bank, Kasumpti Shimla -9. Dasti Copy .
(2.) RESPONDENT was duly served for 26.7.2010 on the application for condonation of delay. He did not appear despite service. Application was allowed after hearing learned Counsel for the appellant, and also keeping in view the facts detailed in it. Then fresh notice after admission was ordered to be issued to him for today. As per office report, he was duly served but is not present in person and is also not represented by any one. In these circumstances as well as in the face of the orders, dated 14.6.2010 this appeal has been heard in his absence.
(3.) ADMITTED facts as they emerge from the averments made in the complaint before the District Forum below are, that appellant had published an advertisement in various newspapers for allotment of houses of various categories under, Self Financing Scheme 2008 on lease hold basis in Sector -63 of Chandigarh. Copy of the brochure has been filed as Annexure R.1 by the respondent. According to the respondent, he had remitted the requisite amount by way of a bank draft of Rs.3,95,745/ - to the appellant for a three bed room house, value whereof was Rs.39,57,451/ - alongwith the application. But his name was not included in the list of applicants who had applied for being considered in the draw. He got issued legal notice to the appellant followed by the complaint wherein impugned order has been passed. When put to notice, besides disputing the territorial jurisdiction of District Forum, Sirmour at Nahan, stand of the appellant was that name of the respondent was put at Sr. No.115. In the preliminary draw conducted on 30.7.2008, he did not succeed, hence earnest money deposited by him was refunded to him within 30 days of such draw. District Forum below after taking note of the defence has ordered the appellant to refund the sum of Rs.3,95,745/ - with interest @ 9% per annum, with effect from 21.4.2008 to 21.8.2008 and it has also been burdened with damages of Rs.5,000/ - for causing inconvenience, pain and suffering to the respondent. Appellant has also been saddled with cost of Rs.1,000/ -. Hence, this appeal.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.