Case nº Revision Petition No. 1067 Of 2017, (Against the Order dated 18/01/2017 in Appeal No. 1556/2011 of the State Commission Rajasthan) of NCDRC Cases, May 11, 2017 (case Rajasthan Housing Board & Anr. Vs Kumari Leena Arora)

JudgeFor Appellant: Mr. N.K. Chauhan, Advocate
PresidentMr. D.K. Jain,President and Mrs. M. Shreesha,Member
Resolution DateMay 11, 2017
Issuing OrganizationNCDRC Cases

Order:

  1. By this Revision Petition, Rajasthan Housing Board (for short "the Housing Board") and its Deputy Housing Commissioner call in question the legality and the correctness of the order dated 18.01.2017, passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bench No.3 at Jaipur (for short "the State Commission") in Appeal No. 1556 of 2011. By the impugned order, while overturning the order dated 19.07.2011, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum at Alwar (for short "the District Forum") in Complaint Case No. 429/2010, whereby the Complaint filed by the Respondent herein and her father had been dismissed, the State Commission has come to the conclusion that there was deficiency in service on the part of the Housing Board in rejecting the Application filed by the Complainants for allotment of a house under the Special Registration Scheme, 2007, floated by the Housing Board for the Economically Weaker Section (EWS). While holding so, the State Commission has directed the Housing Board to take appropriate action on the Application, in terms of the policy conditions, permitting a minor to jointly apply for allotment of the house along with his/her any family member. The State Commission has also awarded a lump-sum compensation of `25,000/- in favour of the Complainants for the harassment and the mental agony suffered by them on account of this arbitrary action.

  2. Learned Counsel appearing for the Housing Board, while assailing the order impugned in this Revision Petition, has vehemently submitted that the State Commission has committed a serious irregularity in ignoring the fact that though the Application did bear the names of the minor daughter and her father, and the Application was purportedly filed in the joint...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT