<p>Former Army chief General V K Singh has alleged “forgery and perjury” by officers of the Army Welfare Housing Organisation. <br /><br /></p>.<p>Gen Singh alleged that AWHO filed an appeal against a consumer court’s order using forged documents. The consumer court had earlier directed the organisation to pay Rs 75,000 to the former army General. <br /><br />Case filed<br /><br />A case has been filed under section 469 (forgery) and 471 (using a forged document as genuine) of the IPC with Connaught Place police station on Tuesday on the basis of Singh’s complaint, police said.<br /><br />Gen Singh, a resident of Palam Vihar in Gurgaon, said the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission had directed AWHO to refund Rs 25,000, and pay a penalty of Rs 50,000 to him in 2009 in a case filed in 2003.<br /><br />The retired General alleged that in an attempt to prove that its houses were cheaper, AWHO only mentioned the covered area of the flats without giving details of the carpet area, wall area or common areas. <br /><br />Singh filed the case against AWHO for more than 10 per cent shortfall in the covered area of a house in Gurgaon.<br /><br />The AWHO had then appealed against the DSCDRC order in the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, but Gen Singh claimed that AWHO officers used forged documents in their appeal.<br /><br />“The DSCDRC had issued an order on January 20, 2009 directing AWHO to pay me Rs 75,000 within one month of the date of receipt of the order, which was issued to both parties on March 18, 2009,” Singh said in his complaint.<br /><br />On September 22, 2009 AWHO filed an appeal in the NCDRC against the DSCDRC order. <br /><br />“Since the time limit for filing the appeal is 30 days, the appeal should have been filed before April 18, 2009,” Singh added.<br /><br />Inked<br /><br />He alleged that to facilitate admission of the appeal in the NCDRC, the date on the copy of the order submitted by the AWHO along with the appeal was altered from March 18 to August 18 by making the figure ‘3’ — written in ink — to figure ‘8’. This was done on the first and last pages of the order. On receipt of a copy of the AWHO appeal, Singh brought this anomaly to the notice of the NCDRC registrar.<br /><br />“In response to a query from the NCDRC, the DSCDRC confirmed that the order was dated January 1, 2009 and received by AWHO on March 26, 2009,” Singh said.<br />He sought a case under sections 466 (forgery of record of court) and 166 (false evidence) of the Indian Penal Code.<br /><br />AWHO claims to have provided houses to army officers fighting and serving in insurgency-hit areas and inhospitable terrain.<br /><br />“AWHO remains dedicated in its mission to provide structurally sound, economically viable and functionally efficient dwelling units to the desirous serving and retired members of the army and their widows on ‘no profit no loss’ basis in the selected popular stations,” its website states.<br /></p>
<p>Former Army chief General V K Singh has alleged “forgery and perjury” by officers of the Army Welfare Housing Organisation. <br /><br /></p>.<p>Gen Singh alleged that AWHO filed an appeal against a consumer court’s order using forged documents. The consumer court had earlier directed the organisation to pay Rs 75,000 to the former army General. <br /><br />Case filed<br /><br />A case has been filed under section 469 (forgery) and 471 (using a forged document as genuine) of the IPC with Connaught Place police station on Tuesday on the basis of Singh’s complaint, police said.<br /><br />Gen Singh, a resident of Palam Vihar in Gurgaon, said the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission had directed AWHO to refund Rs 25,000, and pay a penalty of Rs 50,000 to him in 2009 in a case filed in 2003.<br /><br />The retired General alleged that in an attempt to prove that its houses were cheaper, AWHO only mentioned the covered area of the flats without giving details of the carpet area, wall area or common areas. <br /><br />Singh filed the case against AWHO for more than 10 per cent shortfall in the covered area of a house in Gurgaon.<br /><br />The AWHO had then appealed against the DSCDRC order in the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, but Gen Singh claimed that AWHO officers used forged documents in their appeal.<br /><br />“The DSCDRC had issued an order on January 20, 2009 directing AWHO to pay me Rs 75,000 within one month of the date of receipt of the order, which was issued to both parties on March 18, 2009,” Singh said in his complaint.<br /><br />On September 22, 2009 AWHO filed an appeal in the NCDRC against the DSCDRC order. <br /><br />“Since the time limit for filing the appeal is 30 days, the appeal should have been filed before April 18, 2009,” Singh added.<br /><br />Inked<br /><br />He alleged that to facilitate admission of the appeal in the NCDRC, the date on the copy of the order submitted by the AWHO along with the appeal was altered from March 18 to August 18 by making the figure ‘3’ — written in ink — to figure ‘8’. This was done on the first and last pages of the order. On receipt of a copy of the AWHO appeal, Singh brought this anomaly to the notice of the NCDRC registrar.<br /><br />“In response to a query from the NCDRC, the DSCDRC confirmed that the order was dated January 1, 2009 and received by AWHO on March 26, 2009,” Singh said.<br />He sought a case under sections 466 (forgery of record of court) and 166 (false evidence) of the Indian Penal Code.<br /><br />AWHO claims to have provided houses to army officers fighting and serving in insurgency-hit areas and inhospitable terrain.<br /><br />“AWHO remains dedicated in its mission to provide structurally sound, economically viable and functionally efficient dwelling units to the desirous serving and retired members of the army and their widows on ‘no profit no loss’ basis in the selected popular stations,” its website states.<br /></p>
