The court justified the interest rate of 18% per annum for the refund of the deposited amount by referring to previous cases and held that the scheme was abandoned without valid reasons.

Mr. Justice K.C. Bhargava, President—This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 11.11.1999 passed by District Consumer Forum, Ghaziabad in Complaint Case No. 335/1997.

2. The facts of the case stated in brief are that the complainant applied for a plot in Hastinapuram Scheme and deposited the entire amount by the year 1995. The complainant has not been handed over possession of the land allotted till now. The complainant was told that on account of some unavoidable reasons the said scheme has been abandoned and the possession cannot be given. It was intimated to the complainant that the deposited amount be taken back by him alongwith 5% interest.

3. The opposite party in the written statement had admitted abandonment of the scheme on account of some unavoidable circumstances. Therefore, the amount is to be refunded.

4. The learned District Forum, after considering the case of the parties, allowed the complaint and ordered for return of the money deposited by the complainant alongwith 18% per annum interest. A sum of Rs. 2,000/- was also awarded as compensation and Rs. 200/- as cost of the litigation. It was further ordered that if the amount is not paid within a period of two months, then the interest will run at 20% per annum.

5. Aggrieved against this order of the learned District Forum, Ghaziabad Development Authority has come in appeal and has challenged the correctness of the order.

6. We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant at the admission stage without issuing notice to the opposite party.

7. We find that according to learned Counsel for the appellant, the scheme has been abandoned due to unforceable circumstances. Those circumstances which compelled the Ghaziabad Development Authority to abandon the scheme have not been disclosed for the reasons best known to Ghaziabad Development Authority. Unless a plausible reason is given for abandonment of the scheme, it cannot be said that the scheme was abandoned for unavoidable reasons. The reasons which led to the abandonment of the scheme should have been disclosed by the Ghaziabad Development Authority in order to arrive at a conclusion whether the reasons given by the Ghaziabad Development Authority are valid reasons or not. Unless these reasons are disclosed, it cannot be said that the reason for abandonment of the scheme was unforceable circumstances which was not within the control of the Ghaziabad Development Authority.

8. The Ghaziabad Development Authority has kept the money for all these years with it and utilised the same for its own purpose. Therefore, they will have to pay interest at the rate of 18% per annum. National Commission in the case of George Thomas & Ors. v. Ghaziabad Development Authority, I (1999) CPJ 18 (NC), has held the same view that the rate of interest that should be allowed to the complainant should be the same which the Authority recovers from allottees on defaults on the amounts payable to it.

9. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Surendra Kaur v. Government of Punjab & Ors., (1998) 9 Supreme Court Cases 592, has held that interest shall be payable at the rate of 18% per annum. Similarly the Apex Court in the case of Lata Construction Company & Ors. v. Dr. Ramesh Chandra Ramaniklal Shah & Ors., III (1999) CPJ 46 (SC)=X =1999 (9) Supreme 534, has also upheld the interest of 18% in case of builder.

10. Thus in view of the above case laws, interest at the rate of 18% per annum is justified and the learned District Forum has not committed any mistake in awarding the above interest. However, interest at the rate of 21% per annum cannot be allowed by the learned District Forum. The penal interest as well as the normal interest cannot exceed 18% per annum. Thus the appeal is liable to be allowed to this extent that instead of 20% per annum interest, the same shall be only allowed at the rate of 18% till the refund of the amount.

Order

11. The appeal is partly allowed to the extent indicated above and the interest shall be payab