18 August 2004
Supreme Court
Download

GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs R.B. SHARMA

Case number: C.A. No.-000409-000409 / 2003
Diary number: 23157 / 2002
Advocates: Vs RESPONDENT-IN-PERSON


1

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

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  409 of 2003

PETITIONER: Ghaziabad Development Authority

RESPONDENT: R.B. Sharma      

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 18/08/2004

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 plot in 1989 in the  Indirapuram Housing Scheme.  The Respondent paid all dues.  Yet  possession was not delivered within the time promised.  As the  Respondent was in urgent need of accommodation he asked for refund  of his amount with interest thereon.  The Appellants refunded the  amount but deducted a sum of Rs.5,800/-.  The Respondent thus filed  a complaint stating that this amount should also be refunded with  interest thereon.   The District Forum held that as the Appellants themselves not  delivered possession within the time promised, the Respondent was  entitled to the refund of all amounts deposited and the Appellants  could not have deducted the sum of Rs.5,800/-.  It therefore directed  return of that amount with interest at the rate of 18% thereon. The State Forum dismissed the Appeal. The National Forum has also dismissed the Revision. We are in agreement with the observations of the District Forum.  If the Appellants had not delivered possession within the time

2

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

promised the allottee would be entitled to claim for refund.   Where  the refund is claimed due to the faults of the Appellants themselves  they cannot deduct any amount and must refund all the amounts  received from the allottee.  We therefore see no infirmity in the  impugned Order or in the Orders of the District and State Forums.  We  are told interest at the rate of 10% has been paid.  The Appellants  shall now pay to the Respondent the balance amount of interest.  The  interest to be calculated from the date of deposit of each installment  till the date of payment.  If any TDS has been deducted the same shall  also to be refunded with interest at the rate of 18% thereon.  Along  with the payment, the Appellants shall also handover the calculation  sheet showing therein how they have calculated the interest amount.

We clarify that this Order shall not be taken as a precedent in  any other matter having been passed on account of the 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.

The Appeal stands disposed off according.