Man gets overpaid for DDA ‘irregularity’

The National Consumer Commission has slammed the Delhi State Commission for awarding damages to a complainant in excess of what was sought by him,saying it was not empowered to do so and committed an "irregularity".

The National Consumer Commission has slammed the Delhi State Commission for awarding damages to a complainant in excess of what was sought by him,saying it was not empowered to do so and committed an “irregularity”.

The order was passed on a plea of the DDA seeking revision of the State Commission’s order directing it to allot a flat which “never existed” besides paying a compensation of Rs 2.5 lakh to the complainant who had been allotted a non-existent flat inadvertently.

“The order ‘to allot the same flat in the same area and on the same terms and conditions as agreed’ of the state commission cannot be sustained for the simple reason that it has failed to take into consideration the fact that the DDA admitted that the allotment was a mistake as no such flat ever existed,” the bench,comprising members Justice B N P Singh S K Naik,said.

Story continues below this ad

It said that the compensation amount was raised to Rs two lakh by the complainants Savita K Bedi and Anil K Bedi in the appeal before the State commission against their original claim of Rs one lakh before the district forum.

“What is very unusually striking in State Commission’s order is that it has enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs 2.5 lakh even though the complainant himself had sought compensation of Rs two lakh in their memo of appeal.

“This amount,in fact,had been raised by the complainant against their original claim of Rs one lakh as compensation in the complaint filed before the district forum. In doing so,the State Commission has committed an irregularity in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction,” the Commission said.

It said that the state commission should have taken into account the fact that the complainants did not comply with the follow-up procedure after the issuance of the allotment-cum-demand letter.

Story continues below this ad

“The State Commission has failed to consider that apart from original deposit of Rs one lakh as the registration money,the complainant has not complied with the allotment-cum -demand letter for the allotment of alternate flat,” it said.

It restored the order of the Forum which had directed the DDA either to provide an alternative flat or refund their deposit money with interest besides paying Rs 25,000 as compensation.

The complainants were issued the allotment letter in 2005 but they could not find the flat at the allotted place in Rohini after which they reported the matter to the DDA.

Subsequently,the DDA allotted another flat to them in Rohini area and asked them to deposit the demanded sum but they approached the forum seeking a newly-constructed flat in some good locality.