IMPORTANT POINT
Housing Board cannot take unduly long time to complete its project.

M. Shreesha, Presiding Member—Challenge in these Revision Petitions under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, ‘the Act’) is to the common order dated 15.01.2016 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chhattisgarh, Raipur (in short, ‘the State Commission’), in First Appeal Nos.15/532–15/537, 15/539-15/439, 15/538 and 15/531, respectively, preferred by the Opposite Party. By the impugned order, the State Commission partly allowed the Appeals preferred by the Chhattisgarh Grih Nirman Project, setting aside the compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- awarded by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Durg (in short, “the District Forum”), while confirming the rest of the directions given by the Forum.

2. Since all these Revision Petitions deal with common facts, they are being disposed of by this common order. For the sake of convenience, RP No.1188/2016 is being taken as the lead case and the purchasers are hereinafter is referred to as the ‘Complainant’ and ‘Chhattisgarh Grih Nirman Project’, the residential scheme formulated by the Chhattisgarh House Construction Board, a statutory body constituted under M.P. GrihNirman Mandal Adhiniyam1972, is hereinafter referred to as ‘ the Housing Board’.

3. The brief facts as set out in the Complaint (as can be gleaned from the half-baked translation) are that the Complainant, attracted by the facilities offered in the Brochure published by the Opposite Party had applied for allotment of a house which was accepted and Orchid 244, No. 116, was allotted on 23.08.2013 along with a piece of land and the Complainant was informed about the installments to be deposited along with the estimated costs. It was averred that as per Para 2 of the allotment letter the cost of the proposed house is only an estimated one and that final cost may be raised upto 10% for which a separate consent will not be taken and if there is a possibility that the final cost may be raised by more than 10%, the Complainant would be informed. It was also stated that if the Complainant is not agreeable with the increase of 10%, his/her deposited amount will be returned with an interest @ 5% p.a. It was pleaded that apart from this, on demand of refund of amount deposited by the applicant to the Housing Board for any other reason, the rules and terms and conditions existing in the Division / Circle for the refund of amount shall be binding on the Applicant. It was pleaded that in para 17 of the Rules, it was clearly mentioned that the price for the said building under the said financing scheme shall be determined and the Sale Deed shall be executed in favour of the concerned allottees after getting the complete amount of the said plots. The Sale Deeds so executed in favour of the allottees shall be safely deposited with the Housing Board along with the mortgaged documents. Para 18 of the Rules stipulates that the allottee has to give his or her consent for the building construction on the allotted plot on non-judicial stamp paper of Rs.50,000/- in favour of the Housing Board. The Board has prescribed a sum of Rs.27,60,000/- as the booking price. The catalogue price of the house also included a provisional escalation amount of 5%, contingency amount of 1%, supervision charges of 10%, architectural fees of 2.5% and also life time membership fees for club facilities.

4. According to the payment schedule of the Allotment letter, the construction of the building was to be completed within a span of 24 months. The terms and conditions of the Housing Board mentioned in the brochure was applicable to all the flats/houses constructed by the Housing Board. Clause 2 of the terms and conditions provided for the pricing of the houses. It was indicated in this clause that after completion of the house, the Complainant was bound to pay upto 10% increase in final landed price and no consent was required to be taken in this regard from the allottee. However, if the landed price was expected to