GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs K.C.JINDAL

THIS is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 11.3.1998 passed by District Consumer Forum, Ghaziabad in Complaint Case No. 464 of 1997.

THE facts of the case stated in brief are that the complainant applied for an HIG self- financing house in Indrapuram Housing scheme on 14.3.1992. THE cost of the house was indicated as Rs. 4,40,000/-. THE complainant deposited a sum of Rs. 2,85,000/-. In the brochure it was mentioned that after the payment of three instalments, the possession of the house shall be given to the party, but the construction has not been started as yet. Ghaziabad Development Authority on 16.5.1994 intimated the complainant that due to certain reasons the house cannot be constructed, and the complainant could at the most be allotted a plot of 150 sq. mts. Thereafter the complainant on 27.11.1995 applied for refund of the entire amount deposited alongwith 21% per annum interest. On 22.8.1995 Ghaziabad Development Authority returned a sum of Rs. 2,85,000/- without any interest. The complainant has now filed this complaint praying for 21% per annum interest to be given to him and he should be awarded a sum of Rs. 5,500/- on account of compensation and expenses.

The opposite party in the written version has alleged that according to the payment schedule, the amount was not deposited. The complainant was informed to take back his money. The complainant did not agree to allotment of a plot. Hence the amount deposited by him was returned.

THE learned District Forum after considering the case of the parties, directed the Ghaziabad Development Authority to pay 18% per annum interest from the date of deposit till the date of return of the principal amount alongwith Rs. 200/- as cost. If the compliance is not made within two months, then interest at the rate of 21% per annum was to be paid. Aggrieved against the order of the learned District Forum, Ghaziabad Development Authority has come in appeal and has challenged the correctness of the order passed by the District Forum.

WE have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Learned Counsel for the appellant has argued that on account of certain unavoidable reasons the houses could not be constructed. The reasons for not being able to construct the houses have not been indicated by the appellant. The complainant had deposited a huge amount with the Ghaziabad Development Authority and the appellant has utilised this money for its own purposes for all this period. Therefore, the Ghaziabad Development Authority is bound to pay interest on the principal amount. The learned District Forum has not committed any error in granting 18% per annum interest. According to learned Counsel this interest is on a higher side. We do not agree with this contention. The interest at the rate of 18% has been awarded by the National Commission in the case of George Thomas & Ors. v. Ghaziabad Development Authority, I (1999) CPJ 18 (NC). Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Surendra Kaur v. Govt, of Punjab & Ors., (1998) 9 Supreme Court Cases 592, has held that interest shall be payable at the rate of 18% per annum. Similarly the Apex Court in the case of Lata Construction Company & Ors. v. Dr. Ramesh Chandra Ramaniklal Shah & Ors., III (1999) CPJ 46 (SC)=X (1999) SLT 77=1999 (9) Supreme 534, has also upheld that interest of 18% in case of builder. However, in default of compliance of the order within two months, the learned District Forum has awarded interest at the rate of 21% per annum which could not have been done by the learned District Forum. Hence the penal interest is reduced to 18% per annum. With this modification the appeal is liable to be dismissed. ORDER

THE appeal is partly allowed and the interest is reduced from 21% per annum to 18% per annum. With this modification the rest of the order of the learned District Forum is confirmed. Let compliance of the order be made within a. period of two months from the date of this order. Appeal partly allowed.