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

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  5122 of 2004

PETITIONER: Haryana Urban Development Authority                      

RESPONDENT: Shakuntala Devi

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 10/08/2004

BENCH: S. N. VARIAVA & ARIJIT PASAYAT

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T [Arising out of SLP (C) No. 13047 of 2003] (WITH Civil Appeal No. 5123 of 2004 [Arising out of SLP ) No. 13049/2003]

S. N. VARIAVA, J.         Leave granted.

       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 these cases the Respondent (in C.A. No.5122 of 2004 [Arising  out of SLP (C) No. 13047]) was allotted two plots bearing Nos. B-SE- III No. 31 and 43 in Model Town, Kalanwali.  The Respondent (in C.A.  No.5123 of 2004 [Arising out of SLP (C) No. 13049])  was allotted two  plots bearing Nos. B-SE-III No. 18 and 30 in Model Town, Kalanwali,  from Punjab New Mandi Township which later on merged with HUDA.  The Respondents have paid all dues.   But the possession was not  offered.   

On 9th December, 1994 offer for possession was given to the  Respondents by the Appellants.  However, the Respondents refused to  accept the same.

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

On the facts, the District Forum held that the Respondents are  entitled to interest at the rate of 15% on the amounts deposited by  the Respondents after one year from the date of auction till the date of  offer of possession.   The District Forum further directed payment of  Rs.5,000/- towards mental tension and harassment and Rs.1,000/- as  litigation charges.     

The State Forum partly allowed the Appeals filed by the  Appellants by modifying the order of the District Forum to the extent  that interest was held to be payable after two years from the date of  deposit.    The Respondent did not go in Revision before the National  Commission.  The Appellants went in Revision before the National  Commission.  The National Commission has awarded the interest 18%  p.a. allowable after two years from the date of the respective deposits.    

       For reasons set out in the Judgment in the case of Ghaziabad  Development Authority vs. Balbir Singh (supra), the order of the  National Commission cannot be sustained and is hereby set aside.  We  are told that possession has been taken of all plots in 1997 and 1998.   Under these circumstances, in our view, the Order of the State Forum  was fair and correct.  It stands restored.    

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.

       These Appeals are disposed of accordingly.  There will be no  order as to costs.