DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs PARABASEE COOPERATIVE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD

-IN these three appeals, appellants were the opposite parties before the State Commission where the respondents/complainants Cooperative Group Housing Societies had filed a complaint alleging deficiencies in service on the part of the appellant. Undisputed facts of the case are that the respondents had applied for allotment of land for housing purposes. Priority in allotment of land was to be given as per guidelines issued by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Delhi which was challenged before the Hon''ble High Court who quashed the procedure suggested/adopted by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies.

THESE three complainants-Societies-the respondents before us had also applied for land earlier, but since they were not allotted land in terms of the order of the High Court they sought refund of the money which was deposited which was dismissed along with interest @ 12% per annum for the period from the date on which the societies asked for refund till the date of refund. Not satisfied with this, a complaint was filed before the State Commission, who allowed the complaint in a very short order in terms of its order given in respect of Navjyoti Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd. v. D. D. A. , in Complaint Case No. 134/1994 decided on 16. 10. 1996 in which the appellants DDA were directed to pay interest @ 15% per annum from the respective dates of deposit till the refund/payment along with costs of Rs. 2,000. Aggrieved by this order the opposite party/appellant DDA has filed this appeal before us. Notice was issued to the respondent, but none appeared. Each of the respondent Societies were served through publication in the ''statesman'' and ''danik Jagran'' yet no one appeared, hence they are proceeded ex parte.

Since these three appeals involve a common point of law we go on to decide these three appeals through a common order.

WE heard the learned Counsel for the appellant at some length and also perused material including the order passed by the Hon''ble High Court and also the order passed by the State Commission in Navjyoti Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd. v. DDA. In the cited judgment of the State Commission two points are worth noting : (1) That relying upon the judgment of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Sriniketan Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd. v. Vikas Vihar Cooperative Group Housing Society, AIR 1989 SC 1673 in which the Hon''ble Supreme Court directed payment of interest @ 12% per annum from the date of deposit till the date of refund. The State Commission was candid enough to admit, that when this order was passed there was no condition 6 in the allotment letter. It was admitted position that Clause 6 reads as below : "the proposed allotment shall be subject to final decision in CWP No. 3389 of 1990 and various other writ petitions pending in Delhi High Court and the proceedings pending before any other Courts/forum, challenging the criteria/basis/guidelines for allotment of land. If felt necessary, as a result of the decision therein, the allotment is liable to be reviewed and cancelled. In that event, the entire amount received by the D. D. A. from you shall be refunded without any interest and you shall have no right or claim for any compensation/damages/alternative allotment, on any ground whatsoever. "

(2) Suffice it to say here that the State Commission order in Navjyoti Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd. also incorporated an appeal which reads as follows : "on the basis of the above observation learned Counsel for D. D. A. argued that interest is payable only when the demand of refund of money is specifically made by a Cooperative Society. The complainant-Society was not a party to the said case. However, that judgment clearly shows that DDA is not entitled to take benefit of the aforesaid Clause 6 and escape the liability to pay interest. "

It is argued by the learned Counsel for the appellant that respondent-Societies in the present case, were before the High Court and at best in term of Clause 6 they are entitled to pay interest only after the amount is demanded.

IN our view, the reliance upon the order passed by the State Commission in Navjyoti Cooperative Group Housing Society in toto in the present case was misplaced on account of the fact that the respondents were before the High Court in the writ petition. The learned Counsel for the appellant also relies upon the order of the High Court, wherein it was held that in case Societies are not allotted land then they shall be entitled to interest "with effect from the date of the notice of demand served on the DDA till the date of payment". In view of aforementioned circumstances, we are unable to sustain the order passed by the State Commission which is set aside. The respondents/complainants have already been paid interest from the date the amount was demanded till the date of payment, which is as per law laid down by the Hon''ble High Court in large number of cases, wherein the respondent was also a party hence binding on the respondents/complainants. In view of above, we partly allow the appeal and modify the order of the State Commission in above terms. No order as to costs. Appeal partly allowed.