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

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  5403 of 2004

PETITIONER: Haryana Urban Development Authority

RESPONDENT: Raj Laxmi

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.

       This Appeal is against an Order of the National Consumer  Disputes Redressal Commission dated 27th August 2002.            We have heard the parties.         In our view, there is no infirmity in the reasoning of the National  Commission in directing that the alternate plot be given at the same  price at which original plot was allotted.  However, we are unable to  sustain the further direction that interest be paid by Appellants at the  rate of 18% per annum.  As the Respondent/allottee is already  benefited by getting an alternate plot at the old rate, there is no loss  or damage being suffered by him which would automatically require  such compensation.  In such cases, compensation for mental  agony/harassment by awarding interest at the rate of 9% will be  sufficient.  Of course, if an allottee proves that he has suffered a loss  or damage e.g. having to stay in rental premises and pay rent, then  such loss/damage can be awarded.         In this case, there is no finding of any loss/damage.  We  therefore modify the Order of the National Commission by awarding  interest at the rate of 9% per annum.         With this modification, the Appeal stands disposed off with no  order as to costs.