Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 60 (CHH)

SHUSHANT KUMAR LAHA v. CHHATTISGARH HOUSING BOARD

2007-01-19

R.S.AWASTHI, V.K.AGARWAL, VEENA MISRA

body2007
ORDER V.K. Agarwal, President:- 1. This appeal, under section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, (hereinafter called the ‘Act’ for short) is directed against the order dated 17.05.2006 in complaint No. 2/2005 by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raigarh (hereinafter called the ‘District Forum’ for short) dismissing the appellant’s complaint. 2. Indisputably, the complainant, appellant herein was allotted a house MIG-II-31 by the respondent-M.P. Housing Board (the ‘Board’ for short) in the year 1999, for total considerations for Rs. 3,07,640/-. As per agreement between the parties, after initial payment of Rs.75,000/-, the balance amount was to be paid in the monthly installments of Rs.44,755/- in 15 years. It is further not in dispute that the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.75,000/- in December, 1999 and further a sum of Rs.45,000/- was also deposited by him on 22.12.2000, with the respondent/Board. Thereafter, the complainant/appellant also deposited a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- on 08.10.2001, with the Board. Thus, the comp1amant Paid a total sum of Rs. 3,20,000/- in all as above, toward the consideration of the Said house. It is also not in dispute that the M.P. Housing Board got dissolved and C.G. Housing Board came into existence, which inherited assets and liabilities of the M.P. Housing Board. 3. It appears that the complainant having retired from service and in view of his advancing age, he wanted to pay the balance of amount payable by him to the Board. The complainant averred that he was informed that the balance was Rs. 95,318/-. According to the complainant, the balance as disclosed above was more than it ought to have been; therefore, he continued to write letters to the Board copies of which are on record, in which he prayed that as rate of interest of 17% p.a., was higher, the same should be reduced. It appears that the request of the complainant/appellant met with no response from the respondent/Housing Board. Hence, he approached the District Forum. 4. The complaint was resisted by the respondent/Housing Board. According to them in July 2005, the balance amount of Rs.95,398/- was outstanding against the complainant/respondent. However, later on chartered accountant intimated that an amount of Rs.1,21,666/- is in balance regarding the loan of the complainant in July, 2005. It was averred that the complaint was liable to be dismissed. 5. District Forum in the impugned order held that the complaint is without basis and dismissed it. However, later on chartered accountant intimated that an amount of Rs.1,21,666/- is in balance regarding the loan of the complainant in July, 2005. It was averred that the complaint was liable to be dismissed. 5. District Forum in the impugned order held that the complaint is without basis and dismissed it. 6. Learned counsel for the parties were heard. Record perused. 7. As has been mentioned earlier, the complainant admittedly paid to the Respondent/Housing Board a sum of Rs. 75,000/-on 16.12.1999, Rs. 45,000/on 22.12.2000 and Rs. 2,00,000/- on 08.10.2001. As would be clear from the ledger of the complainant's account, maintained by the respondent/Housing Board regarding the loan, copy of which has been filed in the record of the complaint that after the payment of Rs.2,00,000/- the balance of loan of amount Rs. 60,796/only was outstanding against the complainant on 08.10.2001. It also appears that the complainant was inclined to pay balance amount of the loans as has been urged by the learned counsel for the appellant, but he was aggrieved by higher rate of interest being included and an amount of Rs. 1,19,729/- shown as outstanding against the complainant's loan. 8. Therefore, it would be clear that an amount of Rs.60, 796/- only was outstanding on 08.10.2001. Had the complainant been informed the balance as above, by the respondent/housing board, he would have paid the said amount to clear his outstanding dues, as above. However, respondent/Housing Board did not disclose the balance as above and continued to handle the matter with laxity; and only later on intimated the complainant that the balance payable by him is Rs. 19,729/- as in July, 2005, which included interest payable@ 17% p.a. 9. The complainant is a retired old man and he had to suffer loss, on account of delay as above. In the above circumstances, it appears just and proper to direct that the complainant should be directed to pay the outstanding balance of Rs. 60,796/-, with interest @ 9% p.a. from 08.01.2001 till of this order. The interest as above works out to Rs. 29,728/-; as is agreed to by the learned counsel of the parties. Accordingly, a total sum of Rs. 90,530/- (Rupees Ninety thousand Five hundred and Thirty), (60,796.00+29,728) (after being rounded) is liable to be paid by the complainant/respondent. 60,796/-, with interest @ 9% p.a. from 08.01.2001 till of this order. The interest as above works out to Rs. 29,728/-; as is agreed to by the learned counsel of the parties. Accordingly, a total sum of Rs. 90,530/- (Rupees Ninety thousand Five hundred and Thirty), (60,796.00+29,728) (after being rounded) is liable to be paid by the complainant/respondent. It therefore appears proper to direct that the complainant shall pay the above amount to the respondent in full and final settlement of the outstanding dues of the price of the said house. 10. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. The impugned order dismissing the complaint is set aside. It is directed that the complainant/appellant in full and final payment of the price of the house, shall pay to the respondent/Housing Board a sum of Rs. 90,530/- (Rupees Ninety thousand Five hundred and Thirty). The amount as above shall be paid within a period of 6 weeks; from today, failing which interest thereon shall be payable@ 17% p.a. from the date of default. In the circumstances of the case, parties shall bear their own cost of this litigation, including that of the complaint, as well as that of this appeal. Appeal Allowed.