24 September 2004
Supreme Court
Download

H.U.D.A. Vs ASHOK KUMAR AGGARWAL

Case number: C.A. No.-006035-006035 / 2002
Diary number: 12578 / 2002
Advocates: Vs RR-EX-PARTE


1

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

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  6035 of 2002

PETITIONER: Haryana Urban Development Authority

RESPONDENT: Dr. Ashok Kumar Aggarwal

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 24/09/2004

BENCH: S.N. VARIAVA & A.K. MATHUR

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 bearing No. 1144,  Sector-14(P), Hisar on 21.8.1986.  The Respondent paid substantial  amounts but the possession was not delivered.  Thus the Respondent  filed a complaint.  On these facts, the District Forum awarded interest  @ 15% p.a. on the entire deposited amount.  

The State Forum dismissed the Appeal and confirmed the Order of  the District Forum.  The Appellants went in Revision before the National  Commission.  The National Commission dismissed the Revision filed by  the Appellants relying upon its own decision in the case of Haryana  Urban Development Authority v. Darsh Kumar and observing that  interest @ 18% p.a. has been awarded by them under similar  circumstances.

       As has been stated in so many matters, the Order of the National  Commission cannot be sustained.  It cannot dispose of the matters by  confirming award of interest irrespective of the facts of that case.  The  National Commission may, on facts of a case, award

2

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

compensation/damages under a head set out in Balbir Singh’s case  (supra) if it concludes that such an award is justified. The Order of the  National Forum accordingly stands set aside.

In this case possession has been given on 12th November 1997.   Appellants have also paid a sum of Rs.80,767/- on 29th May 2000.   However, whilst paying this amount they have deducted TDS.   As these  are payments towards compensation/damages for mental agony and  harassment TDS   could not have been deducted.    The Appellants shall  pay to the Respondent within one month from date of this Order the  amount deducted as TDS with interest thereon at 12% from date of  deduction till payment.  In our view the payment already made and the  refund of TDS amount will be sufficient recompense.

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.          With these observations, the Appeal stands disposed of with no  order as to costs.