ASSISTANT ESTATE OFFICER vs T.KRISHNAMMA NAIDU

THIS appeal is preferred by the Assistant Estate Officer, Office of A.P. Housing Board, Gruhakalpa, Hyderabad.

THE respondent herein filed a complaint alleging that he applied to the opposite party for allotment of a house site under MIG group and paid Rs. 1000/- as Earnest Money Deposit on 21.6.1979 and a receipt dated 21.6.79 was passed by the opposite party. According to the complainant he did not receive any intimation from the opposite party about the allotment of house site at Chittoor inspite of making several representations. THE last of such representation being on 30.12.1993. Having waited for a period of 13 years and as he lost of hopes of allotment of any house site, he filed a complaint before the District Forum CDC 206/94 claiming refund of the Earnest Money Deposit of Rs. 1000/- with interest at 18% from 21.6.79 and damages of Rs. 30,000/- and costs. The opposite party filed objections and contended that the opposite party never assured the complainant allotment of any house site immediately after receipt of the application. The opposite party has been making efforts to acquire suitable site at Chittoor right from the year 1982. But due to litigation, they could not acquire any land so far. But there is a proposal to acquire Ac. 49.74 Cents in Mangasamudram and Thimma Samudram village and land acquisition proposals are in the process. Soon after the lands are acquired, the house sites will be allotted to the complainant. It is therefore their case that there are no lapses or deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party and that the opposite party is prepared to refund the amount of Rs. 1000/- to the complainant.

The District Forum held that the complainant in his letter dated 30.12.1993 Ex. A-2 requested for allotment of a house site and referred to the previous correspondence of 16 letters right from the year 1980 to 1993, but did not receive any reply from the opposite party. As the opposite party did not file any document to show that they have sent any reply to the various letters written by the complainant, the District Forum held that there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party as they kept quite for a period of nearly 14 years from 21.6.79 to 1993. As the opposite party agreed in their counter for refund of Rs. 1000/-, the District Forum having regard to the circumstances of the case, that the opposite party did not allot a house site for a period of nearly 15 years, directed refund of the amount of Rs. 1000/-with interest at 18% p.a. from the date of the deposit i.e., 21.6.79 till payment. It also awarded a sum of Rs. 3000/- by way of damages.

AGGRIEVED by the said order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite party. It is submitted by Mr. T. Ramulu, the learned Counsel for appellant that the complainant is not entitled for payment of interest on the Earnest Money Deposit Amount. We are not inclined to agree with the said contention. The money of the complainant was held up with the opposite party for over a period of 15 years with no hope of allotment of any house site in the near future. Since the complainant was deprived of the use of the money for unreasonably a long period, we are satisfied that the complainant is entitled for payment of interest. It is next submitted that the rate of interest at 18% is excessive, as in earlier cases, the State Commission awarded only 12% interest. But having regard to the circumstances of the case, that there is a long delay of 15 years, we are satisfied that the rate of interest awarded by the District Forum is quite reasonable and we are not inclined to interfere with the same.

IT is lastly submitted that having awarded interest, the District Forum ought not have directed payment of Rs. 3000/- by way of damages. We see sufficient force in the aforesaid contention. The awarding of interest is only to compensate the loss suffered by the complainant on account of the deprivation of the use of the money by him. If that is so, the complainant is not entitled for payment of any separate amount by way of damages. In the result, we set aside the order of the District Forum insofar as directed payment of damages of Rs. 3,000/- by the opposite party to the complainant and confirmed the order of the District Forum in the other respects. The appeal is allowed in part. There shall be no order as to costs. Appeal partly allowed.