DDA told to provide flat or pay Rs 30 lakh by consumer forum
- Telangana Bill in Lok Sabha amid din, security beefed up in Seemandhra
- Modi LIVE: Congress is an epidemic which spreads rapidly, says BJP's PM candidate
- Rajiv Gandhi's killers get relief, Supreme Court commutes death penalty to life
- Seven Naxals killed in police encounter in Gadchiroli
- Interim Budget 2014: Economy headache for next government
The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) has been directed by a state consumer commission here to provide a flat to one of its allottees or pay him Rs 30 lakh for selling the unit allotted to him to someone else.
The Delhi State Consumer Commission said the confirmation amount demanded by the DDA from the allottee was "false and fictitious" as the demand related to a flat which was "non-existent".
"The question of complainant not complying with demand does not, therefore, arise. There has been default in the performance of the contract by respondent (DDA) and they are therefore liable to pay (back) the amount received...and to provide another flat to him or pay him compensation.
"In case no flat is available, the DDA will pay him Rs 30 lakh because of sky rocketing prices...Flat is to be allotted within 30 days and if no flat is available, the payment also is to be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order," a bench presided by Justice Barkat Ali Zaidi said.
The commission also directed the DDA to refund Rs 30,000 received towards booking and confirmation from Delhi resident D C Sharma.
The order came on the Sharma's appeal against dismissal of his complaint by a district consumer forum here which had said he was not entitled to a flat as he had not deposited the remaining amount of Rs 4,33,059 within the stipulated time.
Sharma had said he had applied in 1996 for a flat under a housing scheme floated by the DDA that year and in 1997 he had been alloted a flat after he had paid Rs 30,000 towards booking and confirmation as demanded by the authority.
He had alleged that he was given time till June 2000 to deposit the remaining amount, but on filing an RTI application to enquire about the status of his flat he had come to know it had been sold to someone else in 1996.