DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. RAJENDRA PRASAD BANSAL
DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
RAJENDRA PRASAD BANSAL
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) ON account of wrongful deduction of amount from the booking amount of Rs. 50,000 deposited by the respondent with the appellant DDA for allotment of a flat, the District Forum, vide impugned order dated 7.11.2001 directed the appellant to refund the whole of the amount with interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of cancellation of the flat till the date of payment after adjusting the cheque amount of Rs. 21,558 stated to have already been sent to the respondent. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 .
(2.) THE respondent applied for allotment of a flat with the appellant and deposited Rs. 50,000 on 16.9.1996. He was allotted a flat in the draw of lot held on 31.12.1996 and the allotment -cum -demand letter was issued on 20.2.1997/28.2.1997 but the said flat was still under construction without any basic amenities of water and power and allotment -cum -demand letter was sent to the respondent showing the estimated cost of the flat as Rs. 7,90,000 and the respondent was required to deposit the required amount in four instalments. The respondent made a representation to the appellant for payment of the required amount in six instalments as per terms and conditions of the brochure. Request of the respondent was disallowed on the ground that it was a ready builtup flat and as per Clause 10.2 of the brochure the respondent was liable to pay the entire cost of the flat allotted at one go. As a consequence the respondent applied for cancellation of the flat though after 30 days of allotment. Appellant deducted the amount of Rs. 21,528 in terms of Clause 10 of the brochure. Claus 10 of the brochure provides as under :
" Mode of payment of cost of flats after allotment/allocation. Flats on offer being on different stages of construction, the manner in which demands are raised varies for different flats. The amount is demanded in accordance with the progress of the construction work in a given pocket. There are broadly 2 types of cases : (i) For ready built flats, the entire disposal price is demanded after the draw has been held. (ii) For flats where the work is under progress following schedule is generally adopted in raising demands for the flats. (a) 25% (including the demand paid at initial deposit) at the time of allotment/allocation; (b) 20% after next six months; (c) 25% after next six months; (d) 20% after next six months; (e) balance 10% together with escalation, if any, when required to take over possession."
(3.) ON perusal of the terms and conditions of brochure, we find that Clause 11 of the brochure stated that it would take roughly one to two and a half years to complete the construction. Since in the present case the draw was held in December 1996 and according to the DDA s own submission the construction was completed in December, 1997 i.e., after one year of the draw, it is apparent that flat being allotted to the respondent was not a builtup block but in a block where the construction was in progress. In such types of allotment, the amount is payable in six instalments and when his request for payment in six instalments was not acceded to, the respondent applied for cancellation of the flat.
It is also pertinent to mention at this stage that the flat being offered by the appellant did not have the basic amenities of water and power and, therefore, the appellant was rightly held guilty for deficiency in service in not providing the basic amenities of water and power while allotting the flat. Secondly in not allowing to make the payment in six instalments in spite of the fact that the allotted flat was still under construction when the demand -cum -allotment letter was issued to the respondent appellant committed deficiency in service.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.