1. THIS is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 13.1.2000 passed by District Consumer Forum, Ghaziabad in Complaint Case No. 356/1996.
2. THE facts of the case stated in brief are that the complainant applied for an LIG house in Nand Nikunj Housing Scheme on "tatkal" basis in the year 1994. On 12.10.1994 a house was allotted to the complainant by the Ghaziabad Development Authority and the amount required by the Ghaziabad Development Authority was also deposited. THE cost of the house was indicated as Rs. 59,430/- which was to be paid in easy instalments. 50% of this amount was deposited in accordance with the payment schedule. According to the terms of the brochure when 50% of the amount was deposited by an allottee, the possession of the house was to be given. THE complainant after depositing saw the site and came to know that the house No. C-741 which was allotted to him was only partially constructed. THE plaster of the wall was falling and no doors were fitted. THE development work was also not done. This amounts to deficiency in service.
According to the opposite party the price of the house was tentative and the final costing is done only after completion of the house. It was alleged that the entire amount has not been deposited and the possession has also not been taken by the complainant. The complainant should have taken possession of the house in pursuance of the possession letter dated 12.10.1994 which has not been done so far. Hence it is not entitled to any relief.
After considering the facts of the case the learned District Forum came to the conclusion that there was deficiency in service and directed that the possession of the house should be delivered to the complainant within one month after completing the house according to the standards. It also directed that the complainant be paid 15% per annum interest on the deposits made by him. It also allowed a compensation of Rs. 2,000/- and Rs. 200/- as cost.
3. AGGRIEVED against this order of the learned District Forum, Ghaziabad Development Authority has come in appeal and has challenged the correctness of the order passed by the Forum.
We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant without issuing notice to the respondent as it would have unnecessarily burdened the respondent financially.
4. A perusal of the file goes to show that the complainant has deposited 50% of the amount representing the cost of the house. The complainant should have been given possession after the deposit of the amount.
Admittedly the possession has not been given and the complainant has alleged that the construction was not completed when he had deposited 50% of the amount. According to the Ghaziabad Development Authority a letter of possession was issued on 12.10.1995 but when the house was not complete there was no question of taking possession of the house. The opposite party has not shown as to when the house was completed. Before the District Forum the opposite party has not shown any copy of possession letter which has been alleged to have been issued by it. Therefore, it cannot be said that any possession letter was issued to the complainant. Therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve the contention of the complainant.
It has also not been shown by Ghaziabad Development Authority as to whether the entire amount demanded by them till the delivery of possession was not deposited by the complainant. The complainant has specifically alleged these facts. Therefore, the case of the complainant had been fully proved and the opposite party is guilty of deficiency in service.
5. THUS we find that the findings of the learned District Forum are perfectly right in the facts of the records and no interference is required. The appeal is, therefore, liable to be dismissed. Order
6. THE appeal is dismissed and the judgment and order of the learned District Forum are confirmed.
Let compliance of the order be made within a period of two months from the date of this order. Let copy as per rules be made available as per rules. Appeal dismissed.
