Rajasthan Housing Board And Ors vs Suraj Devi

The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner- Rajasthan Housing Board challenging the order of Permanent Lok Adalat dt.25.02.2019.

The facts in nutshell are that an application under Section 22(B) of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 was filed before the Permanent Lok

Adalat by the respondent-Smt. Suraj Devi wherein she had sought relief for allotment of flat from Rajasthan Housing Board and further claimed

compensation of Rs.50,000/- and cost of litigation.

The respondent had pleaded in her application that she had applied in the year 1991 for allotment of independent house in Kalpatru Scheme, Sanganer,

Jaipur as she was declared successful applicant and issued registration on 30.03.1991. She pleaded that she was allotted Plot No. P/40/L/G-

4/K.O/P/91, Sanganer by allotment No.61079 under LIG scheme of having 90 meters of plot. She further pleaded that she had deposited the requisite

amount but she was not allotted the plot in Kalpatru Scheme and in arbitrary manner she was allotted a flat No.9/GH/L/3/6 (F.F.) in Sanganer

Scheme.

The respondent had also pleaded that she had deposited the required amount by way of demand draft dt.01.05.2012 issued by the Punjab National

Bank for allotment of plot in Kalpatru Scheme. She further pleaded before the Permanent Lok Adalat that the Rajasthan Housing Board in malafide

action, changed the category of allotment of flat of the respondent and as such prayer was made to adjust the amount which was deposited in

Kalpatru Scheme and after taking the requisite payment, the revised allotted flat was to be given to her.

The petitioner-Rajasthan Housing Board filed reply to the application and pleaded that the respondent was not liable to get any allotment in her favour

as she had failed to deposit requisite amount which was demanded from her by issuing notices from time to time. The petitioner-Rajasthan Housing

Board also took a specific stand that the application was filed with gross delay and even no notice was served on the Housing Board before filing of

any complaint.

The petitioner-Rajasthan Housing Board also pleaded that final notice was given to the respondent after change of her category of allotment of plot

but inspite of several notices, the required payment was not deposited as such allotment was cancelled.

The Permanent Lok Adalat after considering the entire facts has come to the conclusion that the petitioner-Housing Board is required to pay interest

@ 9% per annum on Rs.44,000/- deposited by the respondent with the Rajasthan Housing Board. The Permanent Lok Adalat has also observed that if

the respondent files proof of depositing 15 installments of Rs.120/- each, the Housing Board is required to pay interest @ 9% per annum on such

amount being paid by the respondent. The compensation of Rs.25,000/- for mental agony and Rs.10,000/- for cost of litigation, have also been

awarded.

Mr. P.C. Sharma, counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Permanent Lok Adalat itself has recorded a finding that there has been no proof of

depositing any installment of Rs.120/- in 15 installments and there was also no proof of sending a cheque being encashed by the Rajasthan Housing

Board of Rs.32,932/- and as such the Permanent Lok Adalat has committed an error in giving direction to pay interest on the alleged payment said to

be made by the respondent.

Mr. P.C. Sharma, counsel for the petitioner submitted that the award of compensation of mental agony and cost of litigation was not warranted in the

present facts of the case as the respondent-applicant herself was responsible in not making due payment to the Rajasthan Housing Board and it is the

petitioner- Rajasthan Housing Board who has suffered on account of non- payment of the installments and as such the award of compensation and

cost is required to be set aside by this Court.

Counsel also submitted that the issue of delay and prior notice being served on the Housing Board before litigation, have also not been addressed by

Permanent Lok Adalat.

I have heard counsel and perused the material available on record.

This Court finds that as far as grievance of the petitioner with respect to payment of interest @ 9% per annum in 15 installments of Rs.120/- each,

said to be paid by the respondent is concerned, this Court finds that the Permanent Lok Adalat has made it conditional by holding that the proof of

making payment of installment is required, for award of interest @ 9% per annum.

This Court finds that the said order passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat takes into account the satisfaction of the Rajasthan Housing Board with

respect to payment made by the respondent of the installments and if proper proof is filed by the respondent about payment of installment, in such

eventuality award of 9% interest cannot be said to be unjustified.

The submission of counsel for the petitioner that the compensation and cost of Rs.25,000/- and 10,000/- respectively are not warranted in the present

case, this Court finds that the respondent has made a prayer for allotment of flat and the same has not been accepted and only compensation of

Rs.25,000/- and cost of Rs.10,000/- have been awarded and the same cannot be said to be suffering from any illegality because litigant had to suffer

agony of initiating the legal proceedings against the Rajasthan Housing Board due to non allotment of plot inspite of paying money.

This Court does not find any error in the order of awarding interest @ 9% per annum on the admitted amount deposited by the respondent of

Rs.44,000/-. This Court under writ jurisdiction does not intend to interfere in the order dt.25.02.2019 passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat.

Accordingly, the present writ petition stands dismissed.