Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 5120 of 2004
PETITIONER:
Haryana Urban Development Authority
RESPONDENT:
Capt. Piyush Babbarwal
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. 13910 of 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 this case the Respondent was allotted a plot bearing No. 603,
Sector 38, Urban Estate, Gurgaon vide letter dated 15th December,
1999. The Respondent paid the dues. But the possession has not
been given till date.
The Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Union Territory,
Chandigarh directed payment of interest @ 18% p.a. after two years
from the date of deposit till the actual physical possession handed
over. It also directed to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/- towards
mental agony and harassment and Rs.2,000/- towards costs.
The Respondent did not go in Revision before the National
Commission. The Appellants went in Revision before the National
Commission. The National Commission, while setting aside the award
of Rs.50,000/- granted by the State Forum towards mental agony and
harassment, maintained the rest of the order of the State Forum. We
are told that interest @ 18% has been paid on 18th April, 2003. As set
out in our above-mentioned Order there can be no recovery of
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
amounts paid to the Respondent. We therefore see no reason to
interfere. We direct that the Appellants shall deliver possession within
a period of one year from today. If possession is not delivered within
one year the Respondent will be at liberty to approach this Court.
After the possession is delivered, the Respondent will be entitled to
approach the State Forum for working out the escalation in the cost of
construction. The State Forum will then work out the escalation in the
cost of construction as per the CPWD rates and award the same to the
Respondent. After giving the possession the Appellant shall execute
sale deed and, if applied, also give permission to construct without
claiming anything extra except the registration charges.
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.
This Appeal is disposed of accordingly.