M.P. HOUSING BOARD Vs. SHIVAJI RAO NIKHALE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) this appeal by opposite party-the M. P. Housing Board, arises from the order dated 30.7.2005 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Indore in C. C. No.362/2004 directing the appellant-Board to execute lease/sale deed of the allotted house in favour of respondent-allottee and also pay to him interest @ 12% p. a. on his deposits i. e. , Rs.1,94,887 from 1.6.1995 to 23.5.2003. Cost Rs.1,000 has also been awarded.

(2.) For the purpose of this appeal it is no more in dispute that respondent-complainant was allotted a house No. M-82 GS situated at Nanda Nagar, Indore, by appellant-Board on one time full payment basis, vide allotment letter dated 6.5.1994. The estimated cost of the house was fixed at Rs.1,94,312 + advance lease rent Rs.575, total Rs.1,94,887. The respondent allottee who had already deposited a sum of Rs.90,000 (by way of registration fee, etc.) till that date was required to pay the balance amount of Rs.1,04,887 within 30 dyas and get the lease deed executed before taking possession of the house. It was however, clearly stated in the said allotment order dated 6.5.1994 that the cost indicated in the order is provisional and that the respondent allottee will have to pay the price as may be fixed finally in due course. The respondent deposited the said balance amount of Rs.1,04,887 with the appellant-Board through an account payee cheque on 19.4.1995 i. e. , with a delay of about 10 months. The possession of the house was delivered to the respondent on 23.5.2003. It appears that in the meantime, some additional land was also allotted to the respondent and the final cost of the house including the said additional land was fixed at Rs.2,71,502 and then reduced to Rs.2,51,031 vide letter dated 21.4.2004. After giving adjustment of the amount already deposited by the respondent, he was require to pay the balance amount of Rs.46,169 which he deposited the same day i. e. , 21.4.2004. However, the lease/sale deed of the property still remained unexecuted.

(3.) The main grievance of the respondent before the District Forum was that despite his depositing the entire cost of the house, the possession of the house was not delivered to him for long 8 years. The demand for Rs.46,169 made vide letter dated 21.4.2004 was wholly unjustified still he deposited the said amount under protest. It was further contended that the appellant-Board has been using the said house for its office purpose whereas he had to live in a rented house and pay rent for the same. He thus, claimed interest on his deposit for the entire period of delay, rent at the rate of Rs.500 per month and general damages Rs.1,00,000.