DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016.
Case No.133/2013
Sh. Kuldeep Chaturvedi
S/o Sh. Chand Narain Chaturvedi
R/o H.No.5059, New Kaushik Puri,
Shanti Mohalla, Seelampur-East,
Shahdara, Delhi ….Complainant
Versus
Delhi Development Authority
through its Chairman
Housing Department
D-Block, 2nd Floor, Vikas Sadan,
INA, New Delhi-110023 ….Opposite Party
Date of Institution : 15.03.13 Date of Order 30.05.17
Coram:
Sh. N.K. Goel, President
Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member
Complainant’s case in brief, is that the complainant submitted two application forms i.e. one for a LIG flat and other one for Janta flat after paying registration amount of Rs.1,50,000/- and Rs.50,000/- respectively through drafts in the DDA Housing Scheme, 2010 for LIG Flats and Janta Flats. It is stated that a computerized draw was held on 18.04.2011 whereby no flat was allotted to the complainant under the scheme. Consequently, complainant met with the officials of OP for refund of his registration amounts of Rs.1,50,000/- and Rs.50,000/- respectively but to no use. Complainant sent letters to the Lt. Governor, Vice- Chairman of OP DDA but no action was taken. Thereafter, complainant received letter Ref. No.F.DHS-2010/2082 dated 17.06.2011 wherein it was mentioned that his applications for allotment of flats were rejected by the competent authority and entire amounts deposited against the applications stood forfeited. However, thereafter, authorised signatory of Axis Bank sent two DDs No.054521 of Rs.30,000/- and No.054525 of Rs.1,30,000/- after deducting Rs.20,000/- each against the initial deposits. It is stated that the OP did not even consider single form of the complainant and rejected both the application forms at the primary stage without any justification. It is stated that the second Form of the complainant under DDA Housing Scheme 2010 should not have been accepted by the opposite party and the same should have been returned to the complainant by the opposite party. Both Forms of the complainant have been accepted by the opposite party for their gains and subsequently rejected the said forms by retaining Rs.40,000/- of the complainant without any valid reason and justification. Complainant did not conceal any fact from the OP and disclosed all the things in the application forms. Both the forms submitted by the complainant were in different categories and were deposited in the same bank but nothing was told to him by the bank and accepted both the forms without any objection. Complainant sent a legal notice dated 05.11.12 to the OP but to no use. Hence, pleading deficiency in service on the part of the OP, the complainant has filed the present complaint for issuing the following directions:-
“(a) To refund Rs.40,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% per annum till the date of realization;
(b) Pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant as compensation for the mental agony, harassment and damages suffered by the complainant;
(c) Direct the Opposite party to pay Rs.11,000/- to the complainant as litigation charges.
OP in the written statement has inter-alia stated that the complainant applied under DDA Housing Scheme-2010 vide application No.1420002 dated 23.12.010 through ICICI Bank, Shahdara, Delhi as well as vide application No. 0939372 dated 24.12.10 through Bank of Baroda, Uttam Nagar, Delhi. As per terms and conditions of the Brochure 2 (VI), one person can submit one application only. Further, as per clause 21 of the Brochure, if it is found that the applicant has applied though he was not eligible as per conditions laid down in para 2 of the Brochure or has claimed benefit of reservation on the basis of wrong documents or has submitted more than one application as given in para 2 (iv), V & vi or has given false affidavit/information including quoting wrong PAN number or suppressed any material fact whether at the time of application or at the time of taking over possession or at the time of execution of conveyance deed, the applicant(s)/allotment(s) will be rejected/cancelled summarily without issuing any show cause notice for the same. In case of such cancellation/rejection, amount of registration/earnest money deposited against application (s) shall be forfeited. It is stated that the complainant submitted more than one application under DDA Housing Scheme-2010 in violation of terms and conditions mentioned in the Brochure and hence the applications were rejected by the competent authority and the entire amount was forfeited. However, on sympathetic ground, it was decided by the authority to deduct a sum of Rs.20,000/- from the registration money from each of the applications by way of penalty and administration charges in cases of multiple applications filed under DDA Housing Scheme, 2010. Accordingly, the same has been deducted and the refunded amount had already been encashed by the complainant and hence the contract between the parties concluded and the complainant cannot repudiate the part of transaction. It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.
Complainant has filed a rejoinder and reiterated the averments made in the complaint. It is stated as under:-
“…the opposite party should not have accepted two applications of the complainant at the time of submission of the same. The applications of the complainant should have been rejected at the time of submission of the same but the applications of the complainant were accepted by the opposite party at the time of submission of the same for their monetary benefits. Thus, a sum of Rs.40,000/- of the complainant was deducted by the opposite party without any justification which is totally illegally, unfair and improper.”
Complainant has filed his own affidavit in evidence. On the other hand, affidavit of Sh. A. K. Bisht, Director (H-II) has been filed in evidence on behalf of the OP.
Written arguments have been filed on behalf of the parties.
We have heard the arguments on behalf of the complainant and have also gone through the file very carefully.
Admittedly, the complainant had submitted two application forms i.e. one for a LIG flat and other one for a Janta flat after paying registration amount of Rs.1,50,000/- and Rs.50,000/-. When the complainant could not became successful in the computerized draw held on 18.04.2011 he applied for refund of the money. OP vide letter dated 17.06.2011 informed the complainant that his applications for allotment of flats had been rejected by the competent authority and entire amounts deposited against the applications stood forfeited. However, OP through the Bank sent two DDs No.054521 of Rs.30,000/- and No.054525 of Rs.1,30,000/- after deducting Rs.20,000/- from each application forms. According to the complainant, the action of the OP was not justified. The copy of the DDA Housing Scheme, 2010 has been filed on the record. The relevant clause of the policy reads as under:-
2. Eligibility
I to V……………………
VI. One person can submit one application.
Copy of the applications forms have been filed on the record which are dated 23.12.10 & 24.12.10 wherein it is clearly mentioned at the bottom of the application forms as follows:
“ I/We hereby declare that the information given above is true to the best of my/our knowledge and nothing is false and no material/information has been concealed therefrom. I/We have carefully read and understood the terms and conditions contained in the Brochure along with instructions and hereby agree to abide by them. I/we comply with the eligibility criteria given in the Brochure to apply under the scheme. I know that if it is found that if I/we have applied although I/we am/are are not eligible as per conditions laid down in para 2 of the brochure or have claimed benefit of reservation of reservation on the basis of wrong document or has submitted more than one application as given in para 2 (IV & V) or has given false affidavit/information quoted wrong PAN number or has/have suppressed any material fact whether at the time of application or at the time of taking over possession or at the time of execution of conveyance deed, the applicant (s)/allotment (s) will be rejected/cancelled summarily without issuing any show cause notice for the same. I also know that in case of such cancellation, entire amount deposited against applications(s)/allotment(s) shall be forfeited without any intimation/advice.”
Copy of the letter dated 13.03.12 issued under the signature of Commissioner (Housing) has been filed on the record wherein it had been decided by the competent authority in its meeting held on 30.01.12 to deduct a sum of Rs.20,000/- from the registration money from each of the applicant by way of penalty and administration charges in cases of multiple applications filed under the DDA Housing Scheme, 2010.
The complainant submitted two applications through two different banks on two different dates. After the closing of the last date for submitting the applications the banks must have sent the application forms to the OP. Before that, the OP had no opportunity to scrutinize the applications. Therefore, the submission of complainant that the OP ought to have returned one of the applications at the time of deposit is not correct.
In view of the above, it is crystal clear that the OP has rightly forfeited a total sum of Rs.40,000/- against the two application forms submitted by the complainant though OP could have forfeited the entire amount deposited by the complainant i.e. Rs.2 lacs. It is a settled principle of law that a person cannot take advantage of his own wrong.
In view of the above discussion, we do not find any merit in the complaint and dismiss it with no order as to costs.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on 30.05.17.
