DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs DEEPAK KUMAR BAKSHI

FEELING aggrieved of the impugned order dated 20.8.1997 passed by the District Forum whereby it has been directed to pay interest @ 15% p.a. on the amount of Rs. 8,95,737.94 on account of delayed possession of the flat besides compensation of Rs. 1,000/- the appellant has preferred this appeal. The main contention of the Counsel for the appellant is that the District Forum has wrongly concluded that there was a delay on the part of the appellant in handing over the possession as the payment of the last instalment towards the cost of the flat was made by the respondent on 23.5.1994 whereas the letter of possession was issued on 1.8.1994 and actual physical possession was handed over on 2.9.1994 and as per terms of the allotment of the flat the appellant was required to hand over the possession within 6 months of the payment of the last instalment. However, we have perused the terms of the agreement. There is no such term which permits the appellant to take six months period in handing over of the possession of the flat after receipt of the last instalment. Rather there is a term that the possession shall be handed over within a period of 90 days after the payment of last instalment.

EVEN if we assume that aforesaid dates are correct still the fact remained that the possession was handed over on 2.9.1994 though the last instalment was paid on 23.5.1994 which was beyond the prescribed period of 90 days. However, the Counsel for the respondent contended that the full payment of the cost of the flat was made on 26.5.1993 and not on 23.5.1994 and all the formalities were completed by 30.7.1993 and thereafter the appellant raised further demands of interest and miscellaneous charges. It is further contended that since these were illegal demands the respondent was not liable to pay as no interest is chargeable on the cash down payment.

Be that as it may the fact remained that the possession was handed over on 2.9.1994 and there was clear-cut delay of 2 months for which the appellant has been rightly directed to pay interest at the rate 15% p.a.

AS regards the contention of the Counsel for the appellant that after having awarded interest the District Forum should not have awarded compensation we do not find any merit as the interest was rightful claim of the respondent whereas the compensation is awarded to the consumer on account of mental agony and harassment he suffers due to deficiency in service or unfair trade practice. We do not find any merit in the appeal and dismiss the same. 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 dismissed.