Case nº Revision Petition Nos. 4422 and 4814 of 2012 of National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, September 17, 2014 (case 1. Madan Lal Sunger, 2. Rajasthan Housing Board Vs 1. Rajasthan Housing Board, 2. Madan Lal Sunger)
| Judge | For Appellant: Party-in-Person and For Respondents: Pankaj Kumar Singh, Advocate |
| President | K.S. Chaudhari, J. (Presiding Member) |
| Resolution Date | September 17, 2014 |
| Issuing Organization | National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission |
Order:
K.S. Chaudhari, J. (Presiding Member)
-
Both these revision petitions arise out of one order of State Commission, hence, decided by common order.
-
R.P. No. 4422 of 2012 has been filed by the petitioner/complainant and R.P. No. 4814 of 2012 has been filed by OP/petitioner against the order dated 1.10.2012 passed by Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jaipur (in short, 'the State Commission') in Appeal No. 1483 of 2006 by which, while allowing appeal, order of District Forum dismissing complaint was set aside and complaint was allowed.
-
Brief facts of the case are that complainant/petitioner booked house in scheme advertised by OP on 20.3.1981 in Alwar. Lottery was drawn on 23.3.1992 and complainant was allotted house in N.E.B. Scheme of the Housing Board at Alwar. Initially, he was to be allotted complete constructed house, but OP vide letter dated 23.11.1992 informed complainant that possession of skeleton house will be given. Complainant denied receipt of aforesaid letter, but submitted that as per information given by friends, complainant gave consent for taking possession of skeleton house on 31.10.1995 and asked for total price of the house. On 19.3.1997, allotment letter was issued by OP in favour of complainant with details of rates and amount to be deposited. Complainant requested for adjustment of seed money and OP issued fresh allotment letter on 6.10.1997 in which price of land was calculated of the year 1993 and construction price was calculated of the year 1996. Complainant made representations for calculating price of land and construction of the year 1992, but in vain. Alleging deficiency on the part of OP, complainant filed complaint before District Forum, Jaipur in 1998. Learned District Forum dismissed complaint vide order dated 26.11.2001 on the ground of territorial jurisdiction. Complainant again filed complaint before District forum, Alwar alleging deficiency on the part of OP. OP resisted complaint and submitted that allotment letter had already been cancelled on 31.7.1998 and prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District Forum after hearing both the parties dismissed complaint. Complainant filed appeal before State Commission and learned State Commission vide impugned order allowed appeal and directed OP to issue fresh allotment letter with direction to charge price of land and construction of the year 1992 and further directed to charge simple interest as fixed by RBI from...
To continue reading
Request your trial