1. RAJASTHAN Housing Board and Others-petitioners herein, which were the Opposite Parties before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kota (for short ''the District Forum" have filed the present Revision Petition against Order passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan (for short ''the State Commission'') dated 17.2.2006, wherein and whereunder, the State Commission has dismissed the Appeal filed by the petitioners and confirmed the Judgment of the District Forum.
2. SHORTLY stated, the facts are:
Complainant/respondent got herself registered under the Housing Scheme floated by the petitioners known as Special Registration Scheme for the Low Income Group on 15.11.1989. It was stated in the Complaint that the petitioners allotted House No. 4-F-9 on 26.3.1997 in favour of the respondent. Accordingly, the respondent deposited, in total, a sum of Rs. 41,000, on different dates, till the date of filing of the Complaint, towards the cost of the house allotted to her. That allotment letter was issued to the respondent on 26.3.1997 wherein the cost of the House was mentioned as Rs. 1,45,417 and respondent was to deposit the balance amount of Rs. 1,18,494 (after deducting the sum of Rs. 26,923) in monthly instalments of Rs. 1,500 each. That the payment of the instalments was to begin after handing over of the possession by the petitioners. It was averred that in spite of having received the full cost of the house, the petitioner-Board could not hand over the possession of the house to the respondent on time and the house constructed was not according to the specifications mentioned in the booklet issued by the petitioner-Board as there was no flooring, no plaster, no latrine and no bathroom in the house. Thus, being aggrieved, respondent filed the Complaint before the District Forum alleging deficiency in service on the part of the petitioners.
3. PETITIONER-Board, after service, put in appearance and filed its Written Statement admitting that the respondent had been allotted a house and that a sum of Rs. 26,923 had been received from the respondent and a sum of Rs. 1,18,494 was to be received in instalments. The petitioner-Board did not admit the remaining averments made in the Complaint and stated that the house was incomplete and the respondent had not taken the possession of the house deliberately and that the petitioner-Board has not committed any deficiency in rendering service. Thus, denying the allegations made in the Complaint, petitioners prayed for dismissal of the Complaint.
4. THE District Forum, after taking into consideration, the pleadings as well as the evidence led by the parties, rejected the contention raised by the petitioners concluding that it was nowhere mentioned in the booklet issued that only the structure was being sold and held that the petitioner was trying to handover the possession of an incomplete house to the respondent. The District Forum directed the petitioners to complete the disputed house according to the booklet and deliver the possession of the house to the respondent and recover the remaining instalments only after handing over possession of the house. Rs. 200 were awarded as cost of litigation.
5. BEING aggrieved, petitioners filed an Appeal before the State Commission. Agreeing with the view taken by the District Forum, the State Commission has dismissed the Appeal.
6. BEING aggrieved, petitioner has filed the present Revision Petition.
7. THE Original Record of this case was sent for which had been received.
8. COUNSEL for the petitioner contends that the house was sold to the respondent on ''as-is-where-is'' basis and the respondent having agreed to accept the house on ''as-is-where-is'' basis could not contend that the house given to him was incomplete. That as per terms agreed upon between the parties, the structure was to be handed over to the respondent without any facilities.
9. AS against this, Counsel for the respondent contends that the house was to be completed in all respects and handed over to the petitioner after constructing bathroom, latrine, etc.
10. COUNSELS for the parties have been heard at length.
11. A perusal of the Original Record, which had been sent for, we find that the terms and conditions, on the basis of which, the house was sold to the respondent, have not been brought on record. On the basis of the Brochure, present on record, wherein it was stated that the house would be sold on ''as-is-where-is'' basis, it cannot be accepted that the respondent had agreed to accept a bare structure without any facilities, which are normally provided in the houses. Moreover, ''as-is-where-is basis'' Clause would be applicable where the property is being sold after construction, so that the other side would have an opportunity to inspect the property and agree to buy it on ''as-is-where-is'' basis. If the contention of the petitioner is accepted, it would amount to booking of houses today, the possession of which shall have to be accepted by the respondent on ''as-is-where-is'' basis whenever the houses are completed. The house was constructed in the year 1989. The letter of allotment was issued in the year 1997. Credit or discredit for the delay in construction of the houses goes to the petitioners. The petitioners cannot be permitted to handover incomplete house to the respondent without providing for minimum conveniences like water, electricity, bathroom, latrine, etc. The Clause ''as-is-where-is basis'' would be applicable in cases where the property, which is to be sold, is already in existence to enable the prospective buyer to buy the house after inspecting it. A house, which is yet to be built, cannot be sold on ''as-is-where-is'' basis as the same had not been constructed and the buyer did not have the opportunity to inspect the same.
12. WE agree with the view taken by the Fora below that the petitioners have been deficient in rendering the service to the respondent inasmuch as it had tried to handover possession of an incomplete house to the respondent.
13. WE find no infirmity in the Orders passed by the Fora below and dismiss the Revision Petition with costs which are assessed at Rs. 5,000.
14. PETITIONER is directed to handover the possession of the house to the respondent after completing it as per the directions issued by the District Forum within 4 months from today.
