State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
South Delhi Campus Employees ... vs Delhi Development Authority on 9 January, 2009
IN THE STATE COMMISSION:DELHI IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI (Constituted under Section 9 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986) Date of Decision: 9th January, 2009 Complaint Case No. C-80/2001 South Delhi Campus Employees Cooperative G.H.S., - Complainant Regd. No. 1633 (GH), Through A.R.S.D. College, Mr. Rajesh Kr Singla, Dhaula Kuan, Advocate. New Delhi-110021. Through its President, Shri Des Raj Sharma. Versus Delhi Development Authority -Opposite Party Vikas Sadan, I.N.A. Through New Delhi. Ms. Girija Wadhwa, Through its Chairman. Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE J.D. KAPOOR, PRESIDENT MS. RUMNITA MITTAL, MEMBER
1. Whether Reporters of local newspapers be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
JUSTICE J.D. KAPOOR, PRESIDENT (ORAL) This complaint is filed by the complainant-Housing Society seeking total compensation of Rs. 14,36,000/- which include interest of Rs. 11,75,000/- on the initial deposit of Rs. 5,00,000/- towards allotment of land which was never allotted, Rs. 2 lacs for mental pain and agony and Rs. 50,000/- towards damages for harassment and Rs. 11,000/- as litigations charges.
2. Brief facts, as pleaded by the complainant are that the complainant is a Co-operative Group Housing Society registered under Societies Registration Act, vide registration No. 1633 (GH) dated 22-02-1984. The OP vide letter dated 26-10-1990 proposed the complainant to allot the land for construction of flats for its members and sent application performa which was required to be submitted to the OP with relevant details and documents. On 12-11-90 complainant deposited the application form along with a Demand Draft of Rs.
5,00,000/- dated 08-11-1990 drawn in favour of DDA as per requirements of letter dated 26-10-1990 of the OP for allotment of land. Thereafter the office bearers of the complainant approached the OP on several occasions and visited OP office personally for providing of land and OP assured them in this regard but no steps was taken by the OP for providing land to the complainant.
3. That after noticing the irresponsible behaviour and negligent attitude of OP complainant sent a legal notice dated 15-03-2000 to the OP. Finally on 29-08-2000 the complainant received a letter dated 16-05-2000 along with a cheque of Rs. 5,08,900/- dated 12-05-2000 from OP as refund of their deposited amount sent by OP merely on their whims and fancies. The same was accepted by the complainant without prejudice to his legal rights and contentions. The OP has not paid the interest to the complainant on the deposited amount.
4. OP resisted the complaint solely on the basis of judgment of the High Court delivered in CWP 4184/92 dated 31-03-1993 holding that payment of interest will only be made to those societies to whom no reallotment of land has been made. It was taken note that in judgment of High Court no clear cut direction regarding the cut off date of reallotment of land to the societies was given. It was decided by the OP that all the societies in whose case seniority number has been changed and they had not been reallocated land upto the date of judgment of Honble High Court interest will be paid. In view of the specific directions of the Court the OP decided that interest should be payable @ 12% on the amount of allotment money/earnest money deposited by the societies would be eligible for payment of interest.
5. However, OP also pleaded that the matter was considered that from which date interest would become due for payment. It was further decided that interest to the eligible societies shall be payable if the payment of refund has not been made or is not made within 30 days from the date of receipt of request from the society. No interest shall be made within 30 days of the date of receipt of request for refund.
6. Further that the complainant has no locus standi to initiate the present proceedings as the name of the complainant was listed at registration no. 1633 and allotment has been made upto the registration no. 1430. the complainant asked for refund for the first time only on 15-03-2000 and the OP as per the directions of the Honble High Court made the refund with interest @ 12 on 15-05-2000. The interest has been allowed from the date of request for the refund to the date of refund.
7. We have heard the counsel for the parties at length.
Counsel for the complainant has distinguished his case from the view taken by the High Court in the above referred case on the premise that only those societies were not liable to pay interest to whom land has been re-allotted but has not been accepted and in the instant case the land was never allotted to the complainant. The relevant observations of the Delhi High Court in the above referred case are as under:-
It is no doubt true that payment of interest was ordered in the case of Sriniketan Cooperative Societys case (supra) but the important distinction between the present case and that of Sriniketan Cooperative Societys case is that here in the letters of allotment itself it was stated that on the allotment being cancelled no interest would be payable. Therefore, there can be no claim of interest by the societies w.e.f. the date of the deposit. Furthermore the Supreme Court contemplated interest not being awarded to those societies who were re-allotted land. Before us there is no society who had deposited the money and has not been reallotted land. It would, however, be just and fair that if a demand for the refund is made on the DDA then the DDA if it does not repay the money within a reasonable time, should be bound to pay some interest. We are informed that some of the cooperative societies had written to the DDA for refund of money. If the DDA did not refund the money on its own then it would be unfair and it would not be entitled to take benefit of the aforesaid clause 6 and escape the liability to pay interest when a demand for refund of the money is specifically made on it by a cooperative society. In such a case, in our opinion, the DDA would be liable to pay interest @ 12% per annum, which rate was awarded by the Supreme Court in Sriniketan Cooperative Societys case (supra) w.e.f. the date the notice of demand was served on the DDA till the date of payment.
This payment of interest will only be made to those societies whom o reallotment of land has been made.
8. Admittedly in the instant case neither was the complainant allotted any land nor was money refunded to the complainant on seeking its refund vide letter dated 15-03-2000. The High Court has categorically taken the view that if demand for refund of the money is specifically made on it by the cooperative society then the DDA would be liable to pay interest @ 12% p.a. which rate was awarded by the Supreme Court in Sriniketan Cooperative Societys case w.e.f. the date of notice of demand was served on the DDA till the date of payment. It was also observed that this payment of interest will only be made to those societies to whom no reallotment of land has been made.
9. Since in the instant case the land was not allotted to the complainant the question of reallotment did not arise and since the complainant has sought refund of the amount vide letter dated 15-03-2000 the OP-DDA is liable to pay interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of demand of refund and by not doing so it committed deficiency in service.
10. Admittedly the complainant sought refund on 15th March 2000 whereas money was refunded on 15th May 2000 but the learned counsel for the complainant submits that the complainant received the amount only on 26-08-2000. Relevant date is when the complainant received the cheque and not the date when it was shown as dispatched.
11. The reliance placed by the complainant in Shyam sunder Pathak Vs. Bihar State Housing Board III (2003) CPJ 96 (NC) that the OP is liable to refund the deposited amount with interest from the date of deposit has no precedence over the view taken by the High Court as it is the High Court which is the authority who lays down law whereas the National Commission s decision is in view of the facts of a particular case.
12. In view of the foregoing reasons we allow the complaint in the following terms:-
(i) OP shall pay interest @ 12% w.e.f. 1st April 2000 till 25th August 2000
13. Aforesaid payment shall be made within two months from the date of receipt of this order.
14. Complaint is disposed of in aforesaid terms.
15. A copy of the order as per statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be cosigned to Record Room.
16. Announced on 9th January 2009.
(Justice J.D. Kapoor) President (Rumnita Mittal) Member jj