Case nº Revision Petition No. 2415 Of 2016, (Against the Order dated 14/03/2016 in Appeal No. 440/2015 of the State Commission Rajasthan) of NCDRC Cases, February 13, 2017 (case Bhanwarlal Vs Rajasthan Housing Board & Anr.)
| Judge | For Appellant: Mr. Pawan Kumar Ray, Adv. |
| President | Dr. B.C. Gupta,Presiding Member |
| Resolution Date | February 13, 2017 |
| Issuing Organization | NCDRC Cases |
Order:
Dr. B.C. Gupta, Member
-
This revision petition has been filed under section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 14.03.2016, passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as ''the State Commission'') in First Appeal No. 440/2015, "Bhanwarlal versus Rajasthan Housing Board & Anr.", vide which, while dismissing the appeal, the order dated 17.03.2015, passed by the District Forum Chittorgarh in consumer complaint No. 415/2012, filed by the present petitioner, partly allowing the said complaint, was upheld.
-
The facts of the case are that the opposite party (OP) Rajasthan Housing Board Udaipur published an advertisement for their Senti Extension Scheme, Chittorgarh in the newspapers putting certain plots into auction. The petitioner, who is a journalist by profession, deposited a sum of `50,000/- with the opposite party for plot 2-B-51-D, size 8 X 18 Mtr. for which the minimum selling price was fixed at `10,000/- per sq. mtr. A total of 8 persons gave their bids for the said plots, out of whom the bid given by the complainant at a price of `11,513/- per sq. mtr. was the highest. As per the requirements of the Housing Board, the complainant deposited `40,000/- on 15.06.2012 and `1,60,000/- on 16.06.2012 in the ICICI Bank. Being the highest bidder, the complainant was expecting a letter from the OP Housing Board, asking him to deposit the rest of the money, and to obtain possession of the said plot but to his surprise, he received a letter dated 31.08.2012 from the Housing Board, saying that the bid given by him had not been accepted by the Headquarters of the OP Board. The amount of `2,50,000/- deposited by him was also returned without interest vide cheque No. 030557 dated 31.08.2012. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OP Housing Board in not giving allotment of the plot, despite being the highest bidder and payment of the necessary amount, the complainant filed the consumer complaint in question, seeking directions to the OP Housing Board to hand over the possession of the plot after accepting the balance amount as per the price offered during bid, interest @24% p.a. on the amount deposited and a further compensation of `50,000/- against mental harassment and `10,000/- for cost of litigation.
-
In reply, the OP Housing Board pleaded that as per clause 7 of the terms and conditions of the auction, the OP Housing Board had absolute powers to...
To continue reading
Request your trial