1. Dispute regarding compensation for rented accommodation and interest on deposits for plot allotment — Appeal against consumer commission order. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
2000 Supreme(SC) 79
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
N.Santosh Hegde : R.C.Lahoti : S.P.Bharucha
Haryana Urban Development Authority
Versus
Rajnish Chander Sharde
Case No. : 5970 of 1996
Date of Decision : 1/12/00
The court affirmed that awarding interest on deposits made for a plot until the actual delivery of possession is a justified remedy for delayed allotment.
Headnote:(A) Consumer Protection - Interest on deposits - Delay in allotment of plot - National Commission directed payment of interest at 18% per annum on amounts deposited from 1979 until allotment and delivery of possession - No justification found to interfere with such direction. (Para 1)
Facts of the case:
A respondent claimed compensation for rented accommodation due to delay in plot allotment. The lower commission instead directed the appellant to pay interest at 18% per annum on the amounts deposited by the respondent from 1979 until a new plot was allotted and possession delivered. The appellant challenged this order, later seeking to limit the appeal to the interest accumulated during a stay order.
Findings of Court:
The court found no merit in the appeal and noted that the appellant's own written statement did not support the challenge. The direction to pay interest was upheld and must be fully complied with following the vacation of the stay order.
Issues: Whether the award of 18% interest on deposits in lieu of rent compensation for delayed plot allotment was justified.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that there was no justification to interfere with the direction to pay interest on deposited amounts until the delivery of possession in cases of delayed allotment.
Result: Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Challenge to the liability for interest accumulated during the operation of a stay order. (Para 1 )
3. No justification for interfering with the direction to pay interest on deposits in lieu of compensation for rented accommodation. (Para 1 )
4. Judicial non-interference with a consumer commission's direction to award interest on deposits as a substitute for rental compensation. (Para 1 )
5. Appeal dismissed with costs — Stay vacated — Direction to pay interest ordered for full compliance. (Para 1 , 2 )
6. Can a court interfere with a consumer commission's decision to award interest on deposits instead of specific rental compensation?
A court may refuse to interfere with a consumer commission's direction to pay interest on deposits in lieu of rental compensation if no justification for such interference is found. (Para 1 )
7. What is the effect of a stay order's vacation upon the dismissal of an appeal regarding interest payments?
Once an appeal is dismissed and the stay order is vacated, the directions for payment, including any interest that accumulated during the stay, must be fully complied with. (Para 1 )
(1) THERE is no merit in this appeal. Con- sidering what has been stated by the appellant in its own written statement filed before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, we express our surprise that it should have filed this appeal at all. Learned Counsel for the appellant now desires to confine the appeal only to the interest that has accumulated because of the stay order that was passed at the appellants instance by this Court. In the order of the National Commission it is stated that the respondent had claimed compensation for having being compelled to live in rented accommodation from 1982 till 1994 at the rate of Rs. 1,600.00 per month. Instead of making that award, the National Commission directed the appellant to pay interest at the rate of 18% per annum on the amounts that had been deposited by the respondent from time to time from 1979 onwards till anew plot could be allotted to him and possession thereof could be delivered. Given the facts, we see no justification in interfering with that direction and, consequent upon the dismissal of the appeal and the vacation of the stay order, that direction must now be fully complied with.
(2) THE appeal is dismissed with costs.
