Punjab Urban Development And Planning Authority vs RANJIT SINGH

THE learned Counsel for the respondent has filed attested copy of certified copy of order passed by the Honble Supreme Court on 1.8.2005 in Interim Application Nos. 5 -6/2004 in Civil Appeal Nos. 3967 -3968 of 2004, Chief Administrator, PUDA & Anr. v. Shabnam Virk. The Honble Supreme Court passed the following order : ''I.A. Nos. 5 -6 shall be taken up for hearing with the main appeals. However, after hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, it is directed by reference to the order dated 14.6.2004 that the respondent is at liberty to make payment at the unescalated rate without penal interest subject to final decision in the appeals. This shall be without prejudice to the rights of either party.''

THE submission of Mr. S.S. Virk, Advocate for the respondent in this appeal filed against the order dated 1.4.2004 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum -I, U.T., Chandigarh (for short hereinafter to be referred as District Forum) in Complaint Case No. 769/2003, Ranjit Singh v. PUDA and Another, vide which the complaint was allowed and it was directed that the appellant shall charge only advertised price of Rs. 6.30 lac and refund the enhanced amount charged with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of its deposit till its refund, is that the Honble Apex Court has now permitted vide order, preferred to above, the liberty to pay the unescalated amount without penal interest and the same amply supports the impugned order of the District Forum. He further contended that as and when the main appeals are decided by the Honble Supreme Court, as mentioned in the order quoted above, that order will take its effect. For the present, the impugned judgment cannot be faulted with and the very submission raised by the learned Counsel for the appellant of charging enhanced amount with penal interest is contrary to the interim order passed by the Honble Supreme Court. The learned Counsel for the appellant namely Mr. R.K. Sharma, Advocate further contended that in the instant case, the escalated sum has already been deposited by the respondent and the difference between the escalated amount and the advertised amount has been directed to be refunded and it is not a case where the respondent is required to deposit the unescalated amount with the appellant. In our considered opinion, this will not make any change in the case particularly referring to the interim order passed by the Honble Supreme Court, which is to be given effect to and as said earlier, it will be only after the final decision of the case that further action will be required to be taken keeping in view the decision of the Honble Supreme Court. In this view of the matter, we find that this appeal lacks merits particularly in view of the interim order of the Honble Supreme Court and the same is dismissed by leaving the parties to bear their own costs of appeal. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. Appeal dismissed.