SUNITA KATARIA Vs. J V G FINANCE LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the complainant-consumer is directed against the order dated 17.8.1992 of the District Forum, Bathinda in complaint No.109 of 1992, partly allowing the complaint preferred by her.

(2.) The issue herein lies in a very narrow compass and the relevant facts are not in serious dispute. The respondents floated a colony in the name and style of 'chaudhary Charan Singh Awas Yojna-2; at a distance of about 20 Km, from Interstate Bus Terminal, Delhi. On 19.4.1990 the complainant applied for a plot measuring 200 Sq. Yards in the said scheme, the tentative cost of which was Rs.59,600/-. She sent the amount of Rs.5,960/- through demand draft No.15985 as registration fee for the said plot to the respondents and the latter acknowledged the receipt through their letter dated 24.4.1990. The complainant deposited the total amount of Rs.35,700/- with the respondents from time to time as demanded by them, as detailed below: serial No. Amount mode of Payment 1. Rs.5,960/-Demand Draft No.15985 dated 19.4.1990 2. Rs.26,820/-Demand Draft No.939804 dated 26.6.1990 3. Rs.2,980/-Demand Draft No.016159 dated 4.8.1990 the respondents encashed the aforementioned demand drafts and issued receipts to the complainant. It was alleged that on 26.6.1990 she wrote a letter to the respondents for the cancellation of her registration of the plot and requested them to refund the amount of Rs.35,760/- to her. The case of the complainant was that seeing that the respondents were not responding to her requests to refund her the amount, she moved a complaint before the District Forum, Bathinda, praying that the respondents be directed to refund her the amount of Rs.35,760/- with interest at the rate of 24% p. a. from the dates of depositing the amounts till the date of payment. On notice being issued the respondents controverted the allegations of the complainant. The District Forum, after appraisal of the evidence, held that the complainant was entitled to the refund of Rs.35,760/- and accordingly, directed the respondents to repay the amount to her within 15 days of the passing of the impugned order.

(3.) It would be somewhat manifest from the above that the District Forum had ordered the respondents to refund the amount of Rs.35,760/- to the complainant-appellant. It is pertinent to mention here that in pursuance of the impugned order, the complainant had received the aforesaid amount of Rs.35,760/-. The only controversy revolves round the payment of interest on the amount of Rs.35,760/- to the complainant. The respondents had used the money of the complainant for a long time and the latter was deprived of its use. Therefore, in our view, the appellant is entitled to interest by way of damages on the amount deposited by her. It is known that the rate of interest has gone very high. Even the banks have started paying interest at the rate of 13% p. a. on fixed deposits. Therefore, we are of the view that the complainant is entitled to interest at the rate of 15% p. a. and not at the rate of 24% p. a. , as claimed by her.