- (1.) V .K. Patil, Member. 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 24.02.2011 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum Raipur (C.G.) (herein after referred for short as ''District Forum '') in Complaint Case No.375/2010, whereby complaint of the appellant herein, has been dismissed.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated facts of the case are that the complainant had applied for booking of a house with O.P./Housing Board in its Dindayal Avas Yojna under scheme of low income group after having deposited registration charges Rs.51,000/ - and in turn he was allotted a house no.LIG -299/13 Block/3rd floor by O.P. of which registered sale deed was executed on 2007 and possession of the house was delivered late by 2 years. Complainant averred that Estate officer O.P. had intimated him the estimated cost of the house as Rs.4.25 lacs under self financing scheme which including registration charges Rs.51,000/ - amounted Rs.4,76,000/ -. Complainant averred that he was financed by Chhatisgarh A.G. for Rs.2,35,000/ -. Complainant also averred that officers of O.P., in order to get personal benefit, mentioned in its letter that cost of the house was Rs.4.36 lacs. Complainant further averred that officers of O.P. did not handover possession of houses to the allottees stating that Flooring work, water tank, boundary wall, compound gate, drainage work, water tank on 6th floor etc. were incomplete, as a result he had to live in rented house, thus was to bear loss of Rs.44,000/ -. Complainant averred that due to use of tiles of different colors, he had to spend extra Rs.20,000/ - for leveling work. Complainant alleged that O.P./Housing Board collected unnecessarily Rs.51,000/ - in excess and also he was to bear expenses of Rs.270/ - towards correspondence and Rs.215/ - for visiting office of O.P. frequently besides expenses of Rs.6,000/ - for sufferance due to harassment. Complainant prayed before the District Forum, seeking direction to O.P. for refund of Rs.51, 000/ - collected in excess from him over the cost of house Rs.4.76 lacs besides other compensation as mentioned in the complaint. 3. O.P./Housing Board, in its reply averred that as per letters sent to the complainant, he was intimated about the estimated cost only and the final valuation of the house was to be done on completion of construction work for which the complainant had given due consent. O.P. averred that the complainant was intimated by a letter on 24.02.2007 about increase in the construction cost of house and it was also mentioned that prices were going high and if he was agreeable for the same then he should submit his consent within 15 days in its office. O.P. has further averred that it is a Government organization which functions as per set rules and procedure and house construction work is allotted to contractors after calling tenders for the purpose. O.P. averred that the complainant was properly intimated on completion of house and he had taken possession of the same in satisfaction, after having deposited the requisite amount as per rules. O.P. also averred that for the purpose of smooth going & coming, in case of power failure, Rs.10,000/ - was collected from each of the house allottees and no excess amount was charged fraudulently by its estate officer from the complainant as was alleged in the complaint. O.P. averred that the complaint was liable to be dismissed.
(3.) LEARNED District Forum having perused the documents produced before it and heard arguments advanced by parties, dismissed the complaint.;