SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

UNION TERRITORY CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHANDIGARH
Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.K. Srivastava, President;
Maj. Gen. S.P. Kapoor & Mrs. Devinderjit Dhatt, Members
RAJENDER SINGH—Appellant
versus
CHANDIGARH BUILDERS & PROMOTERS LIMITED & ANR.—Respondents
Appeal Case No. 1 of 2005—Decided on 22.3.2005

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant :Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate.
For the Respondent: None.

In consumer dispute cases, claiming both interest and compensation is not justified in law.

Headnote:

Interest - Consumer Dispute - III (2004) CPJ 22 (SC), II (2004) CPJ 12 (SC), 2004 CTJ 605 - The court discussed the principles of interest and compensation in consumer dispute cases, citing specific cases and legal provisions. It highlighted the application of current interest rates, the role of Reserve Bank of India circulars as standards, and the inapplicability of claiming both interest and compensation.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant sought enhancement of the rate of interest awarded on the refunded amount by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. The respondent builders failed to construct the flats, leading to the appellant's claim for refund with interest and damages.

Finding of the Court:

The court dismissed the appeal, stating that the appellant cannot claim both interest and compensation, as interest is allowed in the shape of compensation. The awarded costs were upheld, and the parties were left to bear their own costs of appeal.

Issues: Enhancement of interest rate, claim for compensation, and costs awarded by the District Forum.

Ratio Decidendi: The court clarified the principles of interest and compensation in consumer dispute cases, citing specific cases and legal provisions. It emphasized the inapplicability of claiming both interest and compensation and upheld the awarded costs.

Final Decision: The appeal lacks merit and is dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs of appeal.

ORDER

Mr. Justice K.K. Srivastava, President—We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and have perused the impugned judgment and order dated 1.10.2004 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U.T., Chandigarh (for short hereinafter to be referred as District Forum) in Complaint Case RBT No. 524/2003. The appeal has been filed for enhancement of the rate of interest awarded to the appellant/complainant on the full amount, which has been ordered to be refunded.

2. The learned Counsel for the appellant in the first place submitted that ICICI Bank had charged interest from the appellant @ 12.5% per annum on the due amount and the same rate of interest should have been awarded to the complainant on the amount deposited by him with the respondent - M/s. Chandigarh Builders and Promoters Limited (for short hereinafter to be referred as Builders). The learned Counsel for the appellant pointed out that in the instant case, the respondent builders failed to construct the flats, which were to be purchased and occupied by the appellant but the respondent builders failed to construct the same and as such the complainant approached the respondent builders for refund of the amount with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of deposit till refund of the amount besides claiming damages and also costs of litigation.

3. The District Forum allowed the complaint partly and ordered for the refund of the full amount deposited by the appellant with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of deposit till the date of actual payment within three months of the receipt of copy of the order failing which the rate of interest would be charged on the said amount @ 10% per annum. The directions contained in the impugned judgment and order regarding refund of the amount with interest @ 6% per annum were not implemented by the respondent builders and as such the appellant/complainant became entitled to rate of interest on the said amount as ordered by the District Forum i.e., @ 10% per annum.

4. The learned Counsel for the appellant placed reliance in support of his contention on the case of H.P. Housing Board v. Varinder Kumar Garg & Anr., III (2004) CPJ 22 (SC)=JT 2004 (6) SC 562, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held in Para 13 as under:

“13. 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 v. Balbir Singh, in future cases.”

5. In view of this clear direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this authority cannot be cited in support of the submissions made by the learned Counsel for claiming interest @ 18% per annum. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has also directed that the District Fora/State Commission shall in future follow the principles of law laid down in the case of Ghaziabad Development Authority v. Balbir Singh, II (2004) CPJ 12 (SC)=2004 CTJ 605, Supreme Court (CP). The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ghaziabad Development Authority (supra), held that the rate of interest on the amount to be refunded will be at the current rate and this will include the amount, which was deposited and the complainant sought its refund. The Hon’ble Apex Court held in Para 21, inter alia, as under:

“.... However, the principles that interest must be granted at the current rate of interest is only applicable where the proceedings are for recovery of debt or damages. They apply where a refund of amount is being claimed and the direction is to refund amounts with interest. The principles which govern grant of interest do not apply to grant of compensation.”

The Hon’ble Apex Court further held in Para 22, inter alia, as under:

“...In case where compensation is directed to be paid, the Commission/Forum must direct that if payment is not made within that time the authority will also pay interest. Such interest must be based on the cu










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top