P.U.D.A. Vs. BHUPINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case, the Petitioner had floated a scheme of H.I.G. houses. The Respondent deposited Rs. 3,000/- in March, 1989 and was allotted registration number. Later on in October, 1989, the said amount was adjusted towards the demand survey scheme of 1989. Hut the Respondent did not have any communication from the Petitioners and, therefore, ultimately the Petitioner refunded the amount in the month of January, 1997 without communicating any reason for that. The Complainant/Respondent made a grievance against the Petitioner for retaining the money for long time without any reason or cause resulting in mental disturbance and financial loss to him as he could not get registered himself elsewhere for a house. Considering all the pros and cons of the case, the District Forum ordered that the Petitioner should pay interest on the said deposits with them at the rate of 18% for a period commencing from two years after the date of deposit till the date of payment. This order of the District Forum was upheld by the Slate Commission. We see no ground to interfere with the reasonable order under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act. The Revision Petition is dismissed. Revision dismissed.