Orissa

Cuttak

CC/333/2023

Mrs Meerabala Mohapatra - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Assistant Housing Commissioner (Rural), Orissa State Housing Board, - Opp.Party(s)

G C Swain & associates

31 May 2024

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CUTTACK.

C.C.No.333/2023

 

            Mrs. Meerabala Mohapatra,

W/o: Dr. P.K.Nayak,

Plot No.1501/B,Sector-6,

Markat Nagar,CDA,Cuttack-753014.                              ... Complainant.

 

                      Vrs.

 

The Assistant Housing Commissioner (Rural),

Orissa State Housing Board,

(Griha Nirmal Bhawan),

                  Bhubaneswar-01.                                                   ...Opp.Party

 

Present:         Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                      Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:    03.10.2023

Date of Order:  31.05.2024

 

For the complainant:             Mr. G.C.Swain,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.P                :             None.

 

Sri Debasish Nayak,President

 

Case of the complainant as made out from the complaint petition in short is that the complainant was an allottee of a MIG house in Mukunda Prasad MIG II Project in the district of Khurda on payment of the consideration money in the year 1986. She had applied for allotment of the said house under the said scheme on 19.7.1986 and pursuance to the said application, the O.P had issued a letter bearing number 35719/OSHB dated 24.10.1986 wherein the O.P had informed the complainant that she was allotted a MIG house for which she was asked to deposit a sum of Rs.20,000/- as token towards acceptance of such allotment.  Accordingly, the complainant had deposited Rs.20,000/-.  On 26.4.1989 through letter number 2975/OSHB, the complainant was intimated to attend the office of the O.P for executing an agreement regarding such allotment of MIG house and thus she was required to present at the office of the O.P on 15.5.1989.  After execution of the agreement on the said date, she was allotted house No.MKP-8 under the scheme by the O.P vide allotment letter number 43085/OSHB dated 24.11.1989.  She was instructed to take physical possession by 15.12.1989.  The complainant has also taken physical possession of the said house but subsequently she could notice that the said allotted house was not conducive for human existence as because there was no provisions of water and power supply.  Immediately, thereafter she approached the O.P and had issued a letter dated 30.6.1990 expressing therein to provide her the minimum requirements like power and water supply so as to make the said MIG house habitable.  When the said house could not be occupied and used, it’s doors, windows, fittings and affixtures were all eaten by white-ants for which the complainant had to sustain a loss amounting to more than Rs.50,000/-.  The complainant had deposited a sum of Rs.30,370/- towards allotment of the said house and had also made the initial deposit of Rs.20,000/-.  To add to her misfortune, the complainant had also received a letter on 17.1.2003 from the Land Acquisition Authority that the land on which the allotted house of the complainant was constructed was to be acquired by the National Highway Authority.  The complainant then had contacted the NHAI on 21.1.2003 and could know that she would be given compensation in lieu of such acquisition of her house with a condition that she has to furnish “No Demand Certificate” from OSHB.  Subsequently, the complainant could know that she was not entitled for any compensation since because the compensation amount was already paid to the State Government.  In this regard she had made a detailed representation through her letter dated 26.8.2013 but the O.P has not taken any step on her such representation.  She had also issued a legal notice to the O.P dated 20.4.2022 and ultimately had approached this Commission with her petition seeking refund from the O.P an amount of Rs.30,370/- alongwith interest thereon @ 12% per annum from the date of such deposit till the final payment is made.  She has also demanded compensation from the O.P to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- towards her mental agony and harassment and further a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards her litigation expenses.  She has also prayed for any other order as deemed fit and proper.

Alongwith her complaint petition, the complainant has annexed copies of several documents in order to prove her case.

2.       Having not preferred to contest this case, the O.P has been set exparte vide order dated 12.11.2023.

3.          The points for determination in this case are as follows:

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P ?

iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by her?

Points no.i & ii.

Out of the three points, for the sake of convenience, points no.i & ii are taken up  first for consideration here in this case both being an equally important.

On perusal of the available copies of documents as furnished by the complainant of this case, it is noticed that infact the complainant was allotted a house under MIG-II Housing scheme at Mukunda Prasad area of Khurda district by O.P of this case.  She had initially deposited a sum of Rs.20,000/- as advance towards the said house and thereafter had paid another sum of Rs.30,370/- to the office of the O.P on instalment basis.  She was allotted the said house bearing number MKP-8 under the said scheme vide allotment letter number 43085/OSHB dated 24.11.1989.  She also admits to have taken possession of her said house but had subsequently made a representation through her letter dated 30.6.1990 to the O.P in order to provide her power supply and water facility.  She had received a letter from the Land Acquisition Authority on 17.1.2003 and after getting the said letter she had given her representation in that regard to the O.P on 26.8.2013. 

As it is noticed that the case of the complainant is grossly barred by limitation because there is undue delay in filing the complaint petition before this Commission. Moreso, the complainant was allotted the house which she had taken possession on 15.12.1989 but she had preferred to make representation to the O.P on 30.6.1990 asking for the minimum requirements of power and water supply.  Thereafter she remained silent till she finally got the letter of Land Acquisition Authority on 17.1.2003 and in this connection she had made representation to the O.P on 26.8.2013.  The case was filed before this Commission by the complainant on 3.10.2023.  The delay as noticed is not at all explained by the complainant for which the case of the complainant cannot be said to be maintainable.  That apart, when the O.P had given possession of the house in question to the complainant which she had occupied but there is no agreement produced by the complainant so as to apprise this Commission that if the O.P was under the obligation to provide power and water supply alongwith the house in order to make it habitable.  In absence of such agreement, this Commission cannot come to a conclusion basing upon conjectures and surmises only and especially when the petition is grossly barred by limitation.  Accordingly, this Commission also finds no deficiency in service on the part of O.P as alleged by the complainant and these two points go against the complainant.

 

 

Points no.i & iii.

From the discussions as made above, the complainant is not entitled to any relief as made by her.  Hence it is so ordered;

                                              ORDER

The case is dismissed exparte against the O.P and as regards to the facts and circumstances of the case without any cost.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 31st day of May,2024 under the seal and signature of this Commission.         

 

                                                                               Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                       President

                     

 

                                                                          Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                             Member

 

 

 

 

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.