http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  7560 of 2002

PETITIONER: Ghaziabad Development Authority

RESPONDENT: Ram Chandra Srivastava

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 28/07/2004

BENCH: S. N. VARIAVA & ARIJIT PASAYAT.

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T

S. N. VARIAVA, J.

       Before this Court a large number of Appeals have been filed by  the Haryana Urban Development Authority and/or the Ghaziabad  Development Authority challenging Orders of the National Consumer  Disputes Redressal Commission, granting to Complainants, interest at  the rate of 18% per annum irrespective of the fact of each case.  This  Court has, in the case of Ghaziabad Development Authority vs. Balbir  Singh reported in (2004) 5 SCC 65, deprecated this practice.  This  Court has held that interest at the rate of 18% cannot be granted in all  cases irrespective of the facts of the case.  This Court has held that  the Consumer Forums could grant damages/compensation for mental  agony/harassment where it finds misfeasance in public office.  This  Court has held that such compensation is a recompense for the loss or  injury and it necessarily has to be based on a finding of loss or injury  and must co-relate with the amount of loss or injury.  This Court has  held that the Forum or the Commission thus had to determine that  there was deficiency in service and/or misfeasance in public office and  that it has resulted in loss or injury.  This Court has also laid down  certain other guidelines which the Forum or the Commission has to  follow in future cases.

       This Court is now taking up the cases before it for disposal as  per principles set out in earlier judgment.  On taking the cases we find  that the copies of the Claim/Petitions made by the  Respondent/Complainant and the evidence, if any, led before the  District Forum are not in the paper book. This Court has before it the  Order of the District Forum.  The facts are thus taken from that Order.   

In this case the Respondent was allotted a flat in the MIG Self  Financing Scheme, Govindpuram in 1988.  The Respondent paid all  dues but was not offered possession.  The Respondent was in the  meantime staying in rental accommodation and paying Rs. 2,000/- per  month.  The Respondent thus filed a complaint.   

On these facts, the District Forum has recorded that possession  of the flat must be given within 2 months.     The District Forum has  also awarded interest on the amounts, which remained deposited with  the Appellants at the rate of 15% p.a.   

The State Forum confirmed the Award.  The Respondent did not  go in Revision before the National Commission.  The Appellants went  in Revision before the National Commission.  The National Commission  has increased the rate of interest to 18% p.a.   

       For reasons set out in the Judgment in the case of Ghaziabad  Development Authority vs. Balbir Singh (supra), the order of the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

National Commission cannot be sustained.  As stated above, the  relevant papers regarding the claim made, the affidavits filed, the  evidence submitted before the District Forum are not produced before  this Court.   In this case possession has been given in 1995.  The  District Forum has not awarded compensation for mental agony and  harassment.     Where possession is given at old rate, the party has  got benefit of escalation in price of land.  Thus there cannot and  should not also be award of interest on the money.  But considering  the fact that the allotment was in 1988 and possession given only in  1995 and in the meantime Respondent had to stay in rental  accommodation and pay Rs. 2,000/- per month he has suffered a loss.   He has also suffered mental agony and harassment.  He should have  been compensated for these.   We assume that the District Forum has  awarded interest at 15% p.a. taking these factors into consideration.   We clarify that in future compensation under those heads must be  given adequately.  In this case we do not interfere as the amount of  interest of 15% per annum makes up for the compensation which  should have been granted under the heads of mental agony,  harassment and loss.   We feel that in this case the Order passed by  the District Forum is just and proper and calls for no interference.  We,  therefore, set aside the Order of the National Commission and restore  that of the District Forum.  We are told that interest at the rate of 15%  has been paid.

We clarify that this Order shall not be taken as a precedent in  any other matter as the order is being passed taking into account  special features of the case.   The Forum/Commission will follow the  principles laid down by this Court in the case of Ghaziabad  Development Authority vs. Balbir Singh (supra) in future cases.         This Appeal is accordingly allowed.  There will be no order as to  costs.