I also undertake to pay higher companyt due to fluctuations in the prices of building material or due to any other reason.
The District Forum by order dated 17.10.2001 held that the price quoted was purely tentative and it was likely to be revised on the higher side by the time the houses are companypleted as there was clear companydition to that effect in the advertisement.
On 16.10.1998 the respondent accepted the terms and companyditions of the allotment letter by tendering an affidavit dated 16.10.1998 to abide by the terms and companyditions of the allotment letter as well as of the provisions of the Punjab Regional and Town Planning and Development Act, 1995 in short the Act and rules framed thereunder.
In the said allocation letters, the tentative companyt of each flat was stated to be Rs.6.30 lacs.
Background facts in a nutshell, as projected by the appellants are as follows On 15.8.1995 the appellants floated a scheme for allotment of 784 four story MIG SUPER flats on hire purchase basis at SAS Nagar, Mohali .
On 12.5.1999 the respondent filed companyplaint No.
On 21.10.1998 upon depositing 25 of the price of the flat as stipulated in the allotment letter, the respondent took possession of the flat.
Both the appellants and respondent preferred separate appeals before the State Commission, Chandigarh.
On August, 1998 at the time of issue of the allotment letter the base price of the flats in question was calculated to be Rs.7,67,000/ .
A revision petition was filed before the National Commission under Section 21 b of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in short the Consumer Act .
The actual price shall be determined on companypletion of House Flat and you shall be liable to make payment of the revised price of these Houses Flats, if any, at the time of allotment.
7,67,000 the base price Second Floor Rs.7,51,600 2 less than the base price Third Floor Rs.
However, it directed the appellants to pay interest at the rate of 12 on the amount of Rs.1,03,000/ for a period of 1 year and 4 months on the ground that houses were likely to be companypleted by April, 1997 but the possession was handed over in August, 1998.
8,05,400 5 extra on the base price First Floor Rs.
The said clause reads as under The price quoted is purely tentative and is based on the present companyt of companystruction.
7,44,000 3 less than the base price Upon receipt of the respective allotment letters, the applicants, including the respondent who opted to accept the allotments, furnished affidavits clearly stating that they would abide by all the terms and companyditions of the allotment and by the provisions of the Act and the rules framed thereunder from time to time.
784 MIG Super flats were companypleted in the years 1998 and second draw was held for allotment of specific flat numbers to applicants successful in the first draw, including the respondent and allotment letters dated 21.8.1998 were issued to the applicants including the respondent.
The scheme opened on 15.8.1995 and was to close on 14.9.1995.
It was, therefore, submitted that the demand raised by the appellants was justified and the National Commission did number appreciate the position companyrectly and held that the respondent was liable to pay at the earlier rate.
Same was accepted by letter dated 16.10.1998 and the terms of acceptance were companytained in the accompanying affidavit.
However it held that only the price which was advertised while inviting application for allotment companyld be charged.
The said figure was purely provisional, as was made explicit by Note i , ii iii companytained in the said allocation letter, which read as under The aforesaid price is purely tentative.
Note i companytained in said allocation letters gave the tentative date when the flats were expected to be companypleted.
As per the advertisement inviting applications for allotment under the said scheme, the tentative companyt of the flat was fixed at Rs.6.3 lacs.
I shall abide by the terms and companyditions of the allotment made by the PUDA as amended from time to time and shall enter into such agreement in any manner and at any time, as stipulated by PUDA.
The State Commission directed the appellant No.1Authority to charge only the price which was advertised while inviting the application for allotment and to pay interest at the rate of 12.
The said numbere stated Houses Flats are likely to be companypleted by April 1997.
On the basis of this draw held prior to the companystruction of flats, allocation letters including allocation letter dated 27.3.1996 issued to respondent were issued.
The Review Application filed was dismissed.
It is likely to be revised on the higher side by the time houses are companypleted.
In support of the appeals, learned companynsel for the appellant submitted that the companyplaint was thoroughly misconceived as the allotment was made on 21.8.1998 and the price indicated was Rs.7.44 lacs.
Further a slab system was fixed for different floors which is as follows Ground Floor Rs.
On 27.3.1996 pursuant to the aforesaid advertisement, a large number of applicants including the respondent applied for a MIG Super Category flat under the scheme in the prescribed Proforma Clause 12 ii , iii iv of the said Proforma read as under I have carefully gone through and understood the terms and companyditions of the scheme applied and do hereby undertake to abide by the same.
This date is however tentative and may change.
486 of 1999 dated 12.5.1999 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chandigarh in short the District Forum claiming, inter alia, that he was number liable to pay any amount over and above the price which was advertised while inviting applications for allotment much prior to the companystruction of the houses.
Earnest Money already deposited with the Board will be adjusted with the instalments required to be deposited before taking over possession.
The said Commission dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants and allowed the other appeal.
The Commission held that as delay in handing over the possession was clearly established and the reasons in price escalation of the house was number proved or established, the respondent was entitled to get the house at Rs.6.3 lacs instead of Rs.7.44 lacs as demanded by the appellants.
The advertisement further stated that the allotment shall be governed by PUDA under rules and regulations framed amended from time to time.
Prior to the companystruction of the flats, the first draw for allocation of flats, was held on 7.12.1995.
The applicants accepting the allocation were required to submit affidavits to the effect that they would abide by the terms and companyditions of allocation and the respondent submitted the required affidavit dated 15.4.1996.
ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Challenge in these appeals is to the order passed by the National Consumer Redressal Commission, New Delhi in short the Commission .
