Senior Citizen Home Complex Welfare Society vs Sushila Ambika

APPELLANT is a Senior Citizen Home Complex Welfare Society. It offered built up flats to senior citizens at Dehradun, which was to be completed by 1996. Respondent being senior citizen applied for A type flat by paying total cost of Rs.

,20,000. HOWEVER, vide its letter dated 30.5.2000 the appellant offered to its member the option of surrendering the flats allotted to them and in case the offer is accepted the surrendering value of the flat Rs. ,25,000 will be paid. 2. Inspite of having accepted such an offer the respondent was denied the aforesaid payment and accordingly she approached the District Forum and obtained the impugned order dated 9.2.2004 directing the appellant to pay Rs. 3,25,000 with interest @ 9% w.e.f. 4.9.2000 till payment. 3. Through this appeal the appellant society has assailed the impugned order mainly on the ground that the appellant was not liable to pay the interest on the amount which was payable in excess on surrendering of the flat and secondly that the respondent did not accept the offer well in time i.e., within stipulated period and as such the appellant was not liable to pay the excess amount inspite of surrender of the flat.

WE have perused the impugned order and find that it was vide letter dated 30.5.2000 that the appellant offered the option to its member to surrender the flat and respondent accepted the offer of surrender of flat and surrendered the flat vide letter dated 4.7.2000 (Annexure 6 of the complaint). The surrendering value of the flat was indicated Rs. 3.25 lakh and Rs. 3.40 lac. Inspite of having received the acceptance of the offer the surrendering value of the flat as indicated was not paid. So much so, the appellant did not respond to the legal notice served upon it by the respondent in this regard.

RELEVANT clause of the letter dated 30.5.2000 sent by the appellant is as under: ''4. Surrendering of flats It has been observed that some flat owners are not utilising their property or not utilising at all. Perhaps it will be beneficial for them to surrender their flats release and release the invested amount with some premium. We are, therefore, making the following offer to flat owners: Category Surrender value For those who have not paid the additional Rs. 15,000 Rs. 3.25 lac For those who have paid the additional Rs. 15,000 Rs. 3.40 lac The aforesaid clause makes it abundantly clear that the appellant was bound to pay surrender value of the flat to the allottees who accepted the offer. However, keeping in view the stand taken by the appellant that the letter of acceptance of offer was not received well in time though it was despatched within stipulated period and also that the surrender value was Rs. 3.25 lacs and not Rs. 3.35 lacs, we feel inclined to waive off the interest awarded by the District Forum by partly allowing the appeal and instead award compensation of Rs. 10,000 for deficiency in service in not making the payment of the surrendering value as per above referred clause.

IN view of the above decision we do not deem it necessary to issue notice to the respondent as under Section 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 the consumer is entitled to the compensation for the loss or injury suffered due to negligence of the OP.

IN the result, appeal is partly allowed to the extent that the appellant shall pay the respondent a sum of Rs. 3.25 lacs and Rs. 10,000 as compensation for deficiency in service and Rs. 1,000 as cost of litigation. The aforesaid amount shall be paid within one month of this order. Appeal is disposed of in above terms. Bank Guarantee/FDR, if any furnished by the appellant be returned forthwith.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and also to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to Record Room. Appeal partly allowed