JUDGMENT : Asper S.K. Kulshrestha , J. (President ): - Thisappeal is directed against the order dated 25-11-2009 of the District ConsumerDisputes Redressal Forum, Morena in C.C. No. 177/2009 whereby the District Forum has dismissed the complaintmade by the appellant. 2.The appellant filed a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer ProtectionAct, 1986 alleging that the Housing Board had advertised a scheme entitled as Mayur One Colony in Morena , inresponse whereof the appellant deposited a sum of Rs .1,05,600/- on 23-8-2005. The scheme was to provide HIG Houses to the eligible applicants. This scheme could not be implemented asthere was a dispute with regard to the land and eventually on 24-11-2006 theHousing Board requested the appellant to take back her money, in accordancewith the procedure laid down for refund of the amount, by letter dated24-11-2006 sent to the appellant by registered post AD. The request wasrepeated by letter dated 5-6-2008 to take the amount immediately failing whichthe appellant would be responsible for the delay. 3.While urgency was emphasised for refund of theamount, it is alleged that later the Housing Board sent a letter dated28-1-2009 calling upon the appellant to deposit the balance amount in connectionwith the construction in another scheme of HIG Junior. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that this letter was neverbrought to the notice of the appellant otherwise the appellant could have optedfor the house in the said scheme. 4.The first question raised by the learned Counsel for the respondent is that theHousing Board having clarified its position on 24-11-2006 about its inabilityto provide the house and the offer to take back refund of the advancedeposited, the limitation would commence from that date and if the computationis made from 24-11-2006 the complaint filed on 9-7-2009 was time barred. 5.In the present case it does not appear so because the amount of advanceremained deposited with the Housing Board and thereafter there was correspondence mainly the letter dated 24-11-2006- and5-6-2008 and thereafter the letter dated 28-1-2009 making a fresh offer. Underthese circumstances, we feel that the learned District Forum has committederror in dismissing the complaint on limitation. 5.In the present case it does not appear so because the amount of advanceremained deposited with the Housing Board and thereafter there was correspondence mainly the letter dated 24-11-2006- and5-6-2008 and thereafter the letter dated 28-1-2009 making a fresh offer. Underthese circumstances, we feel that the learned District Forum has committederror in dismissing the complaint on limitation. 6.In so far as the merits of the case are concerned, as stated earlier, theHousing Board has itself made an offer vide letter dated 24-11-2006 to refundthe amount to the appellant having not elected to a fresh allotment as offeredby letter dated 28-1-2009, which unfortunately the appellant did not receive,the appellant lost a valuable right to elect for the new scheme. In thecircumstances, only the amount deposited by the appellant can be refunded toher with interest. 7.Accordingly, the Housing Board is directed to refund this sum of Rs . 1 ,05,600 /- deposited on 23-8-2005 with interest @ 12% p.a.from the date of deposit till payment thereof. The Housing Board shall refundthe amount within one month from completion of all formalities by theappellant. The appeal is thus partly allowed.