GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs KAMALA ARORA

THIS is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 6.1.2000 passed by District Consumer Forum, Ghaziabad in Complaint Case No. 1421/1984.

THE facts of the case stated in brief are that the complainant applied for a Middle Income Group house in Lajpat Nagar Colony on 1.8.1990 after depositing a sum of Rs. 29,770/-. One house was allotted to the complainant on 10.4.1991. By 23.5.1994 the complainant had deposited Rs. 2,97,522/- but the possession of the house has not been delivered so far. THE complainant has prayed for refund of the amount alongwith 18% per annum interest. In the written version the opposite party has alleged that the construction of the house is going on and as soon as the same is completed, it shall be allotted to the complainant. If the complainant wants to take back the amount, it can be refunded on showing the original receipt.

The possession letter has not been issued to the complainant.

THE learned District Forum after considering the case of parties, came to the conclusion that there was deficiency in service on the part of the Ghaziabad Development Authority and hence it allowed refund of the amount with 20% per annum interest. It also allowed a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as compensation and Rs. 200/- as cost. It was further provided that if the compliance of the order is not made within two months, then interest at the rate of 20% shall be payable. Aggrieved against the order of the learned District Forum the Ghaziabad Development Authority has come in apeal and has challenged the correctness of the order passed by the District Forum.

WE have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant without issuing notice to the respondent/complainant. According to the learned Counsel for the appellant the house could not be completed in time and if the complainant wants to take back the amount it can take back the money according to rules. It has been proved on record that the house which was allotted to the complainant could not be constructed by the Ghaziabad Development Authority within a reasonable time. On the face of facts it is clearly proved that even after depositing the amount by the complainant nine years back, the house could not be allotted to him. Therefore, the order of the learned District Forum is perfectly correct on the face of the facts. However, the interest at the rate of 20% per annum should not have been allowed by the learned District Forum. The same is reduced to 18% per annum in view of the decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the cases of Surender Kaur v. Government of Punjab & Ors., (1998) 9 Supreme Court Cases 592 and Lata Construction Company & Ors. v. Dr. Ramesh Chandra Ramaniklal Shah & Ors., III (1999) CPJ 46 (SC)=X (1999) SLT 77=(1999) 9 Supreme Court Cases 534.

THUS the appeal is liable to be dismissed with the above modification. Order

THE appeal is partly allowed to the extent that the rate of interest shall be payable at the rate of 18% per annum instead of 20% per annum. With this modification the judgment and order of the learned District Forum are confirmed. Let Compliance of this order be made within a period of six weeks from the date of this order.

Copy as per rules be made available to the parties. Appeal dismissed with modification.