STATE HOUSING BOARD Vs. S ROSHAN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The opposite parties in O. P. No.1031/93 of the District Forum, Kozhikode, are the appellants. Appeal is from the order of the Forum dated 15.5.1996.

(2.) The complainant's case is as under. The opposite party advertised on 2.5.1980 that the plots for house building will be allotted in the Calicut Medical College Housing Scheme. The complainant applied for a house plot by paying a registration fee of Rs.2,500/-. In response to the first opposite party's letter dated 20.9.1984 application for allotment was made by the complainant on 1.10.1984. Plot No.52 was provisionally allotted to the complainant on 15.12.1984 and this was subsequently confirmed by letter dated 15.2.1985. This letter confirmed that plot No.53 is finally allotted to the complainant as demanded by the opposite parties. Sale price of Rs.21,940/- was also remitted in addition to the registration fee. By a letter dated 22.4.1987 the opposite party requested the complainant to report at the site. Accordingly he presented himself when he was ordered to pay Rs.1,207/- as extra cost with Rs.29/- as penal interest. This amount was also remitted. On 22.8.1987 the complainant received a letter from the opposite party asking him to take over the plot and the plot was taken possession of. Thereafter the complainant requested the opposite party for permission to construct a house on the plot. Follow up made by the complainant was not successful to the surprise of the complainants. By a letter dated 2,9.1991 the first opposite party asked the complainant to make a better selection if necessary. The complainant was fully satisfied with plot No.53 and hence did not go for a better selection. Thus the complainant has fulfilled all his obligations and what remained was signing of formal agreement. Subsequent to all these the opposite parties informed the complainant that plot No.53 is earmarked for a shopping complex. This was by letter dated 21.7.1993. The opposite parties were in duty bound to execute the sale deed in favour of the complainant and there was long delay in taking proper action by the opposite parties. Alleging deficiency of service after issuing notice the complainant approached the Forum claiming damages as follows: (a) difference in market price of the plot: Rs.1,50,000/-; (b) escalation in cost of construction of a house Rs.1,92,000/-; (c) compensation for mental agony, Rs.20,000/-; (d) compensation for failure to inform the correct position regarding plot and suppressing information etc. , Rs.10,000/-.

(3.) The opposite parties appeared and filed version denying deficiency of service. There was only. a provisional allotment and as per the conditions the allottee should enter into an agreement for taking possession of the property and sale deed will be executed only after the full land value as fixed by the Board is paid. In this case there was only a provisional allotment. The additional amount of Rs.1,207/- of excess land value and penal interest of Rs.29/- was not remitted by the complainant. No plan for construction of the building was submitted for approval. The Board was forced to change the lay out as per the requirement of the Calicut Corporation and the Calicut Development Authority. As per the new lay out plot No.53 with some other adjacent plots were earmarked for a shopping complex. He was given choice to select some other plots which he did not do. The quantum of damages was also disputed through the version.