IMPORTANT POINT
Where complainant had failed to fulfill his part of conditional order he would not be entitled to enforce the conditional direction.

R.K. Batta, Member—The petitioner/complainant, who is an Advocate, paid Rs.5,000 through demand draft on 1.10.2002 as registration fee for allotment of flat pursuant to advertisement given by the opposite parties. The Complainant approached the District Forum by filing C.D. No.339/2004 for direction to the opposite party to receive the first instalment and allot the flat. The case of the complainant was that he had not received any information from the opposite parties regarding payment of first instalment and he was ready to pay the said instalment. The opposite parties had contested the case of the complainant on the ground that the complainant was informed vide letter dated 11.12.2001 that he was allotted MIG flat and was asked to pay first instalment of 10% on or before 15.3.2003 but instead of several letters sent to him, he did not pay first instalment and the allotment was cancelled on 29.3.2003.

2. The District Forum vide order dated 5.1.2005 partly allowed the complaint and directed the complainant to pay instalment amount due to the opposite parties and immediately on receipt of the said instalment amount, the opposite parties were directed to allot MIG flat to the complainant. Subsequently, the complainant filed P.P. No. 50/2005 in C.D. No. 339/2004 for punishment of the opposite party on the ground that the opposite party failed to implement the order of the District Forum. The opposite parties had in fact sent letter dated 15.2.2005 to the petitioner to pay Rs. 9,10,750 which was received by the petitioner on 18.2.2005. However, the petitioner did not pay the said amount. By order dated 11.5.2005 the District Forum directed the petitioner to deposit 50% of the total cost of the flat i.e. Rs.9,10,750 and after deposit of the said amount before the District Forum, the respondent was directed to allot MIG flat to the petitioner. Instead of complying with this order, the complainant filed F.A. No.382 of 2005 before the State Commission. The first appeal was dismissed by the State Commission by order dated 16.5.2006. Therefore, the complainant was bound to comply with the order of the District Forum dated 11.5.2005 vide which he was directed to deposit 50% of the total cost of the flat i.e. Rs. 9,10,750 with the District Forum as directed in the said order upon which the respondent had been directed to allot MIG flat to the petitioner. However, at this stage it may be noted that the complainant had sent letter dated 9.1.2005 to the opposite parties including two demand drafts for Rs.16,000 and Rs.49,000 and to allot the flat upon which the opposite parties vide letter dated 15.2.2005 had informed the complainant that he had to pay Rs. 9,10,750 towards instalment which are due amounting to 90% of the cost. Since the full amount was not paid, opposite parties vide letter dated 25.2.2005 returned demand drafts. On the return of the demand drafts by the opposite parties, the complainant filed I.A. No. 88/2006 to direct the opposite parties to furnish an agreement to sell in token of allotment and issue letter to the Bank to enable him for sanction of loan for payment of full cost of the flat. The opposite parties resisted the said application that the complainant had to make its own arrangement to organize loan. The District Forum allowed I.A. No.88/2006 directing opposite parties to issue letter of allotment so that Bank may be willing to sanction the loan. Subsequent to orders in I.A.88/2006, opposite party’s counsel filed memo before the District Forum stating the provisional allotment letters were already sent to the allottees and on the said letter, the complainant ought to have made arrangement to secure loan amount and paid the outstanding amount of Rs. 9,10,750. It may be mentioned at this stage that petitioner had argued before us that he had not received provisional allotment letter which is at page 39 of record since wrong address was mentioned on it. In the said letter correct address is written except fo