NIRAJ KUMAR Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This order will govern the disposal of RP Nos. 1605 of 2002 and 2677 of 2002 which arise out of a common order dated 2.7.2002 of State Commission, Delhi dismissing appeal had by both the parties against the order dated 17.1.1995 of a District Forum whereby Delhi Development Authority/opposite party was directed to refund the amount paid by Niraj Kumar/complainant with interest @ 15% p.a.

(2.) In short, the facts giving rise to both revision petitions are these. Complainants was a registrant of the opposite party for allotment of a flat under 5th Self-Financing Scheme. Category II. He was allocated a flat on the ground floor in Pocket H & J, Sarita Vihar in January 1988. Total amount of Rs. 1,88,403.05 was to be paid by the complainant by 15.2.1988. Though amount of Rs. 1,90,000 was paid in three instalments but it was beyond 15.2.1988. On possession of said flat not being handed over, the complainant sought the intervention of some VIPs. Ultimately another flat No. 480 on ground floor in pocket F in the said locality was allotted to the complainant in the mini-draw held by the opposite party on 17.2.1993. Vide letter dated 25.5.1993, the complainant communicated rejection of the said flat No. 480. He insisted on allotment of a flat in Pockets H and J which request was not acceded to by the opposite party. So, a complaint was filed seeking direction to the opposite party to allot a flat on the ground floor in Pockets H and J and pay interest @ 18% p.a. on the amount paid by the complainant as also compensation of Rs. 20,000 for mental agony, etc. Complaint was resisted by the opposite party. The District Forum disposed of the complaint with direction noticed above which order was upheld by the State Commission while dismissing the appeals filed by both the complainant and opposite party.

(3.) Contention advanced by Mr. M.L. Lahoty for complainant was that complainant had deposited Rs. 1,90,000 towards the cost of a flat on the ground floor in Pockets H and J, Sarita Vihar though beyond 15.2.1988; case of the opposite party in the written version was that complainant did not furnish satisfactory proof of that payment; considering that stand, direction need be passed to the opposite party to hand over possession of flat No. 480 in pocket F which is still lying vacant to the complainant. On the other hand, argument advanced by Ms. Girija Wadhwa for opposite party was that Self Financing Scheme under which said flat No. 480 was allotted, had been closed by the opposite party; that allocation of flat on ground floor in Pockets H and J in the said locality stood cancelled automatically on complainant's not depositing the demanded amount by the stipulated date i.e., 15.2.1988. According to her, rate of interest of 15% p.a. is on higher side. Complainant does not dispute that payment of Rs. 1,90,000 made by him in three instalments was much beyond the date of 15.2.1988. So allocation of a flat in Pockets H and J as conveyed through the letter Annexure C-4 automatically stood cancelled. It is also not in dispute that thereafter complainant was allotted aforesaid flat No. 480 by the opposite party which the complainant declined in May 1993. There was, thus, no deficiency on the part of opposite party as rightly held by the District Forum/State Commission. That being the position, no direction can be legally passed to the opposite party to hand over possession of said flat No. 480 to the complainant.