Interest on refunds is contingent upon the circumstances of the deposit; voluntary payments do not entitle claimants to interest unless proven otherwise.

JUDGEMENT

A.S. Bopanna, J. Delay condoned.

I.A. No.159570/2019 is allowed. 1. Leave granted in both matters.

2. The common issue arising for consideration in these appeals is with regard to the claim for payment of interest on refund of the amount which had been deposited by the SLP(C) No.31548/2014 Page 1 Digitally signed by Rajni Mukhi Date: 2023.09.05 17:11:33 IST Reason:

Signature Not Verified appellants with the respondent – Delhi Development Authority to avail the benefit of the construction based on additional FAR. The appellants in both these appeals are charitable institutions. The respondent through the notification dated 10.10.2008 issued in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 57 of the Delhi Development Act, 1957 had notified the fixation of rates to be applied for use conversion, mixed land use and other charges for enhanced FAR arising out of MPD 2021. In respect of the institutional plots also, the additional FAR charges were provided therein.

3. The appellant in the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.31548 of 2014 had assailed the said notification insofar as an imposition of the additional FAR charges, in W.P.(C) No.3099 of 2010 before the High Court. The appellant in Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No.2009 of 2015 had assailed the same, in W.P. (C) No.2823 of 2010 before the High Court of Delhi. In the said writ petitions, application seeking interim orders had been moved. Towards SLP(C) No.31548/2014 Page 2 consideration of the said application for grant of interim relief to permit sanction of Revised Plan so as to enable construction and completion, the appellants offered to deposit the disputed amount being the amount demanded towards additional FAR charges which had been assailed in the writ petition. The High Court having accepted the suggestion permitted the appellant to pay the said amount and avail the benefit. The appellants having deposited, availed the benefit and proceeded with the construction.

4. During the pendency of the writ petition, the respondent issued a notification dated 17.07.2012 whereby an amendment was made in para 6(g) to the notification dated 10.10.2008 and 23.12.2008 which were assailed before the High Court. By such amendment, it was provided that no additional FAR charges would be recovered from Educational Societies/Health Care and Social Welfare Societies having Income Tax Exemption. The said benefit became available to the appellants herein and as such the writ petitions pending before the High Court did not SLP(C) No.31548/2014 Page 3 warrant an adjudication on the disputed questions.

Therefore, the High Court in all the writ petitions which were pending before it had taken note of the change made through the subsequent notification and had accordingly disposed of the analogous matters in W.P.(C) No.8572 of 2009 and other petitions through the order dated 20.07.2012. In the said proceedings the deposit which had been made either before the High Court or by w