DDA Vs. KRISHAN LAL NANDRAYOG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents applied for allotment of flats under the Fifth Self-Financing Scheme under Category 2 and Category 3. Even after they made full payment towards the cost of the flats and also after completion of the formalities required to be completed by them, the appellant did not deliver possession of the flats within a reasonable time. The respondents approached the District Consumer Forum seeking damages for the loss suffered by them on account of inordinate delay caused in delivery of possession of flats. The District Forum, after considering the respective contentions and after hearing both the parties, allowed the complaints of the respondents and directed the appellant to pay interest @ 18% on account of delay caused by it in delivery of possession and a sum of Rs. 2000.00 was also awarded as cost to each one of the respondents. The appellant filed an appeal before the State Commission challenging the validity and correctness of the order passed by the District Forum. The State Commission, while affirming the findings recorded by the District Forum, reduced the rate of interest to 15% and in other respects the order of the District Forum was confirmed. The matter did not rest at that. The appellant filed revision before the National Commission challenging the order passed by the State Commission. The National Commission did not find any valid ground to interfere with the order passed by the State Commission and upheld the order passed by the State Commission. The National Commission further directed the appellant to recover the amount towards payment of costs of Rs. 2000.00 to each one of the respondents from its officers. Hence these appeals.

(2.) The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the order made, directing the appellant to pay interest @ 15% is not at all justified and the rate of interest is not consistent with the amended clause 10 of the brochure issued under the Scheme.

(3.) Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents made submissions supporting the impugned order.