Consumers' entitlement to interest on amounts deposited and the court's discretion to reduce the awarded interest based on the circumstances and the fall in the rates of interest.

Mr. Justice V.K. Agrawal, President—These appeals under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 arise from common order dated 28.11.2002 in Case Nos. 322/2002, 323/2002, 324/2002, 325/2002, 328/2002, 329/2002, 330/2002, 331/2002 and 267/2002 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Durg (hereinafter called as ‘District Forum’ for short), whereby the said complaints were allowed and interest @ 18% per annum on the amount deposited by the complainants with the respondents was granted. Since common questions are involved in all these appeals, they are being disposed of by this common order.

2. The facts no longer in dispute are : that the respondent Janpad Panchayat, Durg issued advertisement in the newspapers that it proposes to construct 24 shops on G.E. Road, Durg, and invited applications for allotment of shops in the said scheme. It was promised that allotment shall be made on ‘first come, first served’ basis. The complainants/respondents submitted their applications along with the prescribed registration fee for allotment of shops in response to the above advertisement. The respondent Janpad Panchayat, thereafter, directed the complainants/appellants to deposit 50% of the premium amount. It is also not in dispute that the premium amount was deposited by all the complainants/appellants on 20.7.1998 or 21.7.1998, as enumerated in Para 5 of the impugned order. However, the opposite parties/appellants in their general meeting dated 6.2.2002 passed a resolution that the scheme be abandoned and that the amounts deposited by the various applicants be refunded to them. Intimation of the above resolution was given to the complainants/respondents on 7.3.2002. It is also not disputed that the amount was accordingly refunded to the complainants/respondents. However, no interest thereon was paid to them.

3. The complainants/respondents in their complaint claimed that as the amount deposited by them was retained by the opposite party/appellant for a considerable period of about 4 years; therefore, interest should have been awarded on the amount deposited by them with the appellant-Janpad Panchayat by way of compensation.

4. The complaints were resisted by the opposite party/appellant. They averred that the complainants/respondents could not be termed as consumers. It was contended that amount deposited by the complainants/respondents was refunded to them. However, they were not entitled to any interest on the said amount.

5. The learned District Forum by the impugned order held that the complainants/respondents were consumers. It was also held that since the amounts deposited by them were retained by the appellants/Janpad Panchayat, for a long period, it was liable to pay interest thereon. Accordingly, the learned District Forum directed payment of interest on the said amounts, for the period it was retained by the opposite party/appellant.

6. Learned Counsel for the appellant/Janpad Panchayat in this appeal firstly urged that the complainants/respondents were not consumers. It was further urged that the learned District Forum has awarded excessive rate of interest i.e. 18% per annum which deserves to be reduced.

7. The first question that arises for consideration is : as to whether the complainants/respondents were consumers of the appellant?

8. Undisputedly, the appellants had issued an advertisement seeking applications for booking of shops proposed to be constructed on the G.E. Road, in the premises of appellant/Janpad Panchayat. The complainants/respondents in response to the said advertisement, submitted their applications for allotment of shops along with requisite registration fee. Thereafter, on the demand of the appellant, Janpad Panchayat, they also deposited 50% of the premium amount, as fixed by the appellant. Undisputedly, this amount was deposited with the appellant on 20/21.7.1998 by the complainants/respondents. It is also not in dispute that the scheme ultimately did not materialise and was abandoned by