- (1.) This writ petition has been preferred challenging the order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ranchi in Complaint Case No. 104/2003 dated 27thth October, 2004 as well as the order passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jharkhand, Ranchi in Appeal No. 3/2005 along with A/460/04 dated 15thth July, 2005.
(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the original respondent was allotted house in question in the year 1967. Necessary documents were also executed on 26thth June, 1967. The possession of house no. 2K/62 of Bariatu Housing Colony was also handed over to the original respondent on 4thth July, 1967. The said document has been referred in the written statement filed by the petitioners before the Consumer Forum, which is at Serial no. 62. Similarly there are several documents which are referred by the petitioners, which have not been properly appreciated by the Consumer Forum as well as by the Consumer Commission and has given a direction to hand over peaceful and vacant possession of the aforesaid house or to allot a fresh house to the respondent. It is further submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that once the possession was given in the year 1967, there is no question of giving possession of very same premises, again. Secondly after the year 1967, a complaint was filed by the original respondent in the year 2003 i.e. after 36 years. The complaint was filed by the respondent for the reason that vacant possession of the house in question was not given by the then Bihar State Housing Board. Some letters were also written in the year 1991 by the respondent i.e. after approximately period of 24 years and, thereafter, complaint was filed. Thirdly, it is argued by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the respondent has given premises on rent to one Sri Rameshwar Lal Sharma, who filed Title Suit No. 119 of 2000 against the respondent and in that Title Suit, written statement was filed by the respondent, in which, he has admitted that the plaintiff of Title Suit No. 119 of 2000 was given premises on rent and he has not paid any rent. Thus, written statement filed by the respondent in Title Suit No. 119 of 2000 has also not been properly appreciated by the Consumer Forum as well as by the Consumer Commission. Lastly, it is argued by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that one letter was written by the officer of the Housing Board on 18thth July, 2000. The said document was in favour of the respondent, but, it appears that the said officer had committed an error and wrongly letter was written and, therefore, within couple of days, another letter was written by the very same officer on 3rdrd August, 2000 that the respondent had misguided the said officer of the Housing Board and in fact peaceful and vacant possession of the house in question was already given to the respondent in the year 1967. This letter has also not been properly appreciated by the Consumer Forum as well as by the Consumer Commission and, hence, the judgments and orders passed by the Consumer Forum as well as by the Consumer Commission deserve to be quashed and set aside.
(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that it is true that house in question was allotted by the then Bihar State Housing Board to the respondent, but, somebody was already staying in the said house and, therefore, possession of the house was not given to the respondent. Several letters had been written by the original respondent. First letter was written by the respondent in the year 1991. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents further submitted that instalment of house in question was paid by the respondent and full consideration was paid in the year 1987. Moreover, a letter was also written by the officer of the Housing Board in July 2000 inviting the respondent for taking over vacant possession of the house in question. These documents have been properly appreciated by the Consumer Forum as well as by the Consumer Commission and, hence, the direction was given by both the authorities below to the Jharkhand State Housing Board to allot a new house or to give peaceful and vacant possession of house no. 2K/62 of Bariatu Housing Colony to the respondent. No error has been committed by both the authorities below and, hence, this writ petition may not be entertained by this Court.;