State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Kendriya Sarkari Karamchari Kalyan ... vs D L Rajan S/O Mangi Lal on 9 August, 2017
Daily Order BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,RAJASTHAN,JAIPUR BENCH NO.1 FIRST APPEAL NO: 105/2017 Central Government Employees Welfare Housing Organization, 6th floor, A-Wing, Janpath Bhawan, Janpath,New Delhi Vs. D.L.Rajan s/o Mangilal r/o E-216 Murlipura Scheme, Jaipur. Date of Order 9.8.2017 Before: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Nisha Gupta- President Mr. Abhishek Gotecha counsel for the appellant BY THE STATE COMMISSION ( PER HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE NISHA GUPTA,PRESIDENT):
This appeal has been filed against the order passed by the District Forum, Jaipur 3rd dated 30.11.2016 whereby the claim has been allowed against the appellant.
2The contention of the appellant is that deductions were made as per rule 26 of CHEWHO Rules as the construction was started on 21.11.2002 whereas application for refund was submitted in November 2003. Hence, the appeal be allowed.
Heard the counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned judgment as well as original record of the case.
There is no dispute about the fact that the respondent applied under the scheme and thereafter he asked for the refund. Allotment letter-cum- Notice was issued on 16.9.2003 Ex. D-2 which clearly shows that no specific floor or flat was allotted to the respondent and when no specific floor or flat was allotted withdrawal charges @ 20% of the first installment could not be deducted.
The other contention of the appellant is that construction was commenced on 21.11.2002. This fact has not been stated in reply to the main complaint but in affidavit Mr.P.K.Wadhwa authorized officer of Central Government Employees Welfare Housing Organization has stated that construction was started on 21.11.2002 but to confirm this fact no documentary 3 evidence has been submitted. The contention of the counsel for the appellant is that work order was issued to the particular agency but no such work order is submitted before the Forum below or in appeal. Hence, there is no evidence to the effect that prior to the application for withdrawal construction was started.
Hence, the Forum below has rightly ordered for refund of the amount deducted illegally and there is no merit in this appeal and liable to be rejected and looking at the fact that the appeal has been filed without any substance, the appeal is dismissed with Rs.5000/- cost which should be paid to the complainant within one month from the date of the order.
The facts of the case goes to show that affidavit with false and spurious contentions is submitted just to escape from the liability hence, it is expedient in the interest of justice that inquiry should be made for the offence u/s 193 IPC. Hence, a notice u/s 340 CRPC be issued to Mr.P.K.Wadhwa s/o Late Sh.S.L.Wadhwa authorized officer, Central Government Employees Welfare Housing Organization, 6th floor, A-Wing, Janpath Bhawan, Janpath, New Delhi.
4In view of the above the appeal is dismissed in limine with above cost.
(Nisha Gupta) President nm