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

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  5871 of 2002

PETITIONER: Haryana Urban Development Authority

RESPONDENT: Raj Rani

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. 186,  P.L.A. Sector, Hisar on 16.11.1990.   The Respondents paid substantial  amounts but the possession was not delivered as the plot was  encroached upon by the Police. The Respondent thus filed a complaint.   On these facts, the District Forum awarded interest @ 18% p.a. on the  entire deposited amount after two years of date of deposit till offer of  possession.  

The State Forum directed that interest at the rate of 15% from  date of re-allotment shall be paid.  The Appellants went in Revision  before the National Commission.  The National Commission dismissed  the Revision.

       As has been stated in so many matters, the Order of the  National Commission cannot be sustained.  It cannot dispose of the  matters by awarding interest @ 18% in all matters irrespective of the  facts of that case.  Accordingly the Order of the National Commission  is hereby set aside.

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

In this case possession has been delivered to Respondent in  2002.  A sum of Rs.2,17,614/- being interest at 12% per annum has  also been paid on 21st December, 1999.    However, in making this  payment TDS has been deducted.  We direct that the amount  deducted as TDS be paid to the Respondent within 15 days from date  of this Court along with interest thereon at 12% per annum from date  the amount was deducted till payment.  Save as above, there will be  no further or other Order in this Appeal. 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.