ORDER

PER: - JUSTICE GAUTAM CHOURDIYA, PRESIDENT This order will govern disposal of Appeal Nos.FA/21/97 & FA/21/98 as both these appeals filed under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 (hereinafter called “the Act” for short) involve similar questions of law & facts. The appellants of both these Appeal Nos.FA/21/97 & FA/21/98 were complainants before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Raigarh (hereinafter called “District Commission” for short), in Complaint Case No.CC/2018/25 & CC/2018/24 respectively, which were decided by the District Commission vide two separate orders dated 28/07/2012 and their complaints were partly allowed with directions to the respondent CG Housing Board to pay within 45 days to the appellants / complainants the difference amount of lesser area handed over to them i.e. 165 Sft @ Rs.1875/- per Sft and amount of discount @ 10% along with compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) for physical, mental and financial loss.

Feeling aggrieved, both these appeals have been filed by the appellants / complainants. For the purpose of convenience, the facts of Appeal No.FA/21/97 are being taken into consideration in this order.

2. The common relief sought in both these appeals is that interest @ 9% p.a. be directed to be paid on the entire awarded amount from the date of filing complaint before the District Commission dated 13.02.2018.

28/04/2023 Dismissed Page 3 of 7

3. Undisputedly the appellants of both these appeals being attracted by the advertisement of the respondent – Housing Board applied for allotment of MIG flat. The appellant / complainant was allotted Flat No.MIG-209 and later on it was changed to Flat No. MIG-310, admeasuring B/U/Area 835 Sft. and Super B/U/Area 1000 Sft. and they deposited the amount as per said area Rs.18,75,000/-.

4. As per case of the appellant/complainant of Appeal No.FA/21/97 before District Commission being attracted by the advertisement marked as complainant document Annexure No.1 she submitted application before the opposite parties / respondents herein for allotment of an MIG flat admeasuring B/U/Area 835 Sft. and Super B/U/Area 1000 Sft. in Atal Vihar Chhote Atarmuda scheme on self-finance basis. She was allotted Flat No.MIG-209 and later on it was changed to Flat No.MIG-310 for the said change of flat Rs.5000/- was deposited by the appellant / complainant. It was also advertised by the respondents / opposite parties in newspapers on 21.10.2015 that discount of 10% is being given to the Government employees, for which she applied also. The appellants / complainants purchased registration form by payment of Rs.800/- then on 29.10.2015 deposited the registration fee Rs.2,82,000/- thereafter deposited remaining amount in four installments up to 28.02.2016 and thereby she deposited the entire price of flat total Rs.18,75,000/- with the respondents / opposite parties. On 24.06.2016 lease deed was executed. In the possession letter dated 08.09.2016 issued by the respondents / opposite parties the area of the flat was mentioned as 65.92 Sqm (i.e. 709 Sft.), whereas in the advertisement, Annexure-1, the Super Built Up Area 1000 Sft. (built area of flat was mentioned as 835 Sft) and price of the flat was Rs.18,75,000/-. The area of the flat handed over to the appellant / Dr. Jharna Sahu & Anr. Vs. Estate Officer, CG Housing Board & Ors.

28/04/2023 Dismissed Page 4 of 7 complainant was lesser than the advertised and the discount of 10% which was offered by the Housing Board and applied by appellant/ complainant was not also given. Therefore, alleging deficiency in service on this count and seeking direction for payment of amount of discount and for the lesser area of flat handed over to the appellant/ complainant, the complaint was filed before the District Commission.

5. The opposite parties in their joint written version, except the admitte