AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
V.K.Jain, J
The petitioner/complainant was allotted a booth in an auction held by the respondent. The allotment was made for a consideration of Rs.21,50,000/-. The terms and conditions of allotment were contained in the letter dated 07.01.2011, the English translation of which, to the extent it is relevant, reads as under:
If you want to deposit the remaining 75% amount in lump-sum, then deposit the same in the account of Trust within thirty days from the date of issuance of this letter, if the amount is deposited within thirty days then there will be exemption of 5%. If you want to pay this amount in instalments, then payment of instalments as per schedule mentioned below with 12% interest as per the stipulated date be made within the stipulated period, failing which under Land Disposal rules from the date of payable instalment upto six months (first month 13%, second month 14%, third month 15%, fourth month 16% fifth month 17% and sixth month 18% interest will be charged) and in case of delay more than six months, the above said sold site will be resumed by the Trust and restoration by the Trust by 20% penalty and interest or not is the special right of the Trust.
Sr. No.
Instalments
Amount
Due date
1.
First instalment ¼ share amount
Rs. 1,50,000/- Receipt No. 74946 Rs. 3,87,410/- Receipt No.74977
30.11.2010 1.12.2010
Security Amount
Rs.500/- Receipt No. 74978
1.12.2010
4% Cess charge
Rs.86,000/- Receipt No. 74977
01.12.2010
Amount of Instalments
Interest
Total Instalment
Dated
Second instalment Rs.3,22,500/-
96,750/-
4,19,250/-
29.5.2011
Third Instalment
Rs.3,22,500/-
77,400/-
3,99,900/-
29.11.2011
Fourth Instalment
Rs.3,22,500/-
58,050/-
3,80,550/-
29.05.2012
Fifth instalment
Rs.3,22,500/-
38,700/-
3,61,200/-
29.11.2012
Sixth instalment
Rs.3,22,500/-
19,350/-
3,41,850/-
29.5.2013.
The complainant/petitioner did not pay the second installment even by 29.05.2011 which was the last date for paying the same subject to payment of the interest specified in the allotment letter. The case of the complainant/petitioner is that the second installment was paid by him vide Pay Order dated 20.08.2011 for Rs.4,19,250/- whereas interest for the further delayed period was paid vide Pay Order dated 24.08.2011 for Rs.19,000/-. Both the Pay Orders are stated to have been sent by registered post. The third and fourth installments were paid vide two separate Pay Orders, both dated 11.04.2013. The overdue interest of Rs.19,000/- is also alleged to have been deposited with the respondent. However, the remaining installments were not paid though the fifth installment became due on 29.11.2012 and sixth installment became due on 29.05.2013. The Pay Order towards payment of the second installment is stated to have been returned to the complainant in April 2013 alongwith a forwarding letter though the said forwarding letter has not been placed on record. The possession of the booth had already been handed over to the petitioner/complainant soon after allotment. Since the Pay Order towards payment of the second installment was returned and according to the complainant, remaining installments were not accepted by the respondent, he approached the concerned District Forum by way of a consumer complaint seeking a direction to the respondent to accept the remaining installments without interest and penalty. It was also prayed in the complaint that if the respondent had treated the allotment as cancelled, the same should be treated as null and void.
The complaint was resisted by the respondent which inter-alia took a preliminary objection though the complainant was not a consumer he having taken the property for a commercial purpose. On merits, it was alleged that the complainant was bound to execute an agreement within thirty days as per the terms and conditions of allotment, to execute the said agreement. It was further alleged that the Pay Order received from the complainant was returned since he had failed to pay the installment alongwith interest on late payment.
The District Forum vide its order dated 19.09.2017, directed the respondent to refund the amount received from the complainant alongwith interest @ 8% per annum w.e.f. 26.08.2011 to 11.04.2013. However, the relief sought by him in the complaint was not granted.
Being aggrieved from the order passed by the District Forum, the petitioner approached the concerned State Commission by way of an appeal. Vide impugned order dated 04.05.2018, the State Commission dismissed the appeal. Still being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Commission. Since there is a delay of about forty days in filing the written version, two applications seeking condonation of delay have also been filed.
As noted earlier, as per the terms of allotment, the second installment, amounting to Rs.3,22,500/- could be paid latest by 29.05.2011 alongwith interest amounting to Rs.96,750/- thereby making a total sum of Rs.4,19,250/-. Admittedly, the aforesaid installment was not paid by 29.05.2011. Though, the respondent could accept the said installment even beyond 29.05.2011, alongwith higher interest stipulated in the allotment letter, the said delay could not have been more than six months. According to the complainant, the second installment was paid within the period of six months computed from 29.05.2011 and therefore, the same ought to have been accepted when he had also paid overdue interest on that amount. As far as third installment is concerned, it could be paid upto 29.11.2011 alongwith interest stipulated in the allotment letter whereas fourth installment could be paid by 29.05.2011 alongwith interest stipulated in the said letter. It is an admitted position that neither the third nor the fourth installment was paid within six months from the due date. The delay in payment of the third and fourth installment was more than six months, the same having been paid only on 11.04.2013. The respondent therefore, was not under an obligation to accept the said third and fourth installments.
What is more important is that the fifth and sixth installments which were to be paid by 29.11.2012 and 29.05.2013 respectively, were never paid at all at any point of time. I see no justification for the delay of more than six months in payment of the third and fourth installment and for the default in payment of the fifth and sixth installment which had remained unpaid even when the consumer complaint was filed. In my opinion, the allotment stood automatically cancelled in case of non-payment for more than six months beyond the date stipulated for the payment of the installments. The respondent therefore, was not obliged to restore the allotment as had been made clear in the allotment letter itself. The petitioner having not paid the fifth and sixth installment and having paid third and fourth installment more than six months after the due date, the respondent in my opinion, is entitled to resume the property in accordance with law. Hence, the view taken by both the fora below does not call for any interference by this Commission in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. The fora below have already awarded interest to him @ 8% per annum on the amount of the Pay Order which the respondent had kept with it. The complainant/petitioner, in my opinion, is not entitled to a better relief. The Revision Petition, being devoid of any merits, is hereby dismissed.
It is made clear that dismissal of the consumer complaint will not come in the way of the petitioner/complainant approaching the respondent Board at its administrative side for the restoration of the allotment. If such a request is made, that will be considered by the respondent Board, as per its rules and regulations and the order passed by the fora below or the order passed by this Commission shall not be construed as a direction for the restoration of the allotment. Since I am not inclined to interfere with the orders passed by the fora below, there is no necessity of considering the application for condonation of delay in filing the revision petition. The applications therefore, stand dismissed alongwith the revision petition.