(1.) MR . A. K. Sinha, learned Counsel for the appellants has received cost as per our last order. In this case, the respondent had booked a plot of land on 19.2.1988. The expected time of delivery was two years. But till the filing of the complaint possession was not handed over to the respondent. Ultimately, the State Commission directed the petitioner either to allot a plot of same specification in some other locality and failing that the entire amount together with interest @ 18% from the date of respective dates of deposits till the payment shall be paid. But the State Commission further ordered that complainant shall also be entitled to receive a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as an amount of enhanced cost of construction and if that amount is not paid within two months, it shall carry interest @ 18%. In HUDA v. Darsh Kumar, 2002 1 CPJ 35 (NC) = Revision Petition No. 1197 of 1998, this Commission after considering the whole aspect of case, has come to the conclusion that where the amount is to be refunded in the similar circumstances or there is delay in giving possession the ends of justice will meet if the amount together with interest @ 18% is refunded and the higher rate of interest inter-alia compensates the escalated cost of construction, etc.
(2.) IN the light of that decision which has been consistently follower by this Commission, the award of Rs. 1,00,000/- apart from the refund of the principal amount together with interest @ 18% is totally unwarranted. Accordingly, the relief No. 2 granted in the impugned order, is deleted and rest of the impugned order is upheld as it is. The respondent who has already withdrawn the amount which was deposited by the appellant with the State Commission, shall refund to the appellant through their Counsel, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- together with interest thereon if collected. This amount shall be refunded by means of Bank Draft/Pay Order within a period of four weeks from today. The first appeal is disposed of as above.