ORDER Respondent was allotted house No.II M-2/301, Rajinder Nagar on 1.6.1991. Respondent deposited the estimated cost as well as the enhanced price. Petitioner demanded Rs.22,698/- and Rs.2,000/- as sewerage charges, to which the respondent replied that since he has already paid the amount, he is not liable to pay the amount. Taking that the respondent is not paying the amount, the petitioner cancelled the allotment. Being aggrieved, respondent filed a complaint which was allowed. Petitioner was directed to hand over the possession of the same/alternate house within a month. Petitioner was further directed to -2- pay interest @ 18% p.a. on the amount from the date of deposit till the date of possession. Rs.10,000/- were also awarded by way of compensation. Petitioner being aggrieved, filed the appeal before the State Commission and raised the point that the petitioner was entitled to charge the prevalent market price and not the price which was prevalent at the time of allotment. The State Commission rejected this plea and held that the petitioner was entitled to charge the price prevalent at the time of allotment and not the market price prevailing now. Rate of interest was reduced to 10%. The case came up for hearing before us on 7.2.2012. On the said date counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner accepts the finding recorded by the State Commission that the petitioner was entitled to charge the price prevalent at the time of allotment but contends that the fora below have erred in awarding interest on the deposited amounts in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Bangalore Development Authority vs. Syndicate Bank & Ors. (2007) 6 SCC 711 wherein it has been held that the builder/promoter is not liable to pay interest on the deposited amount as the complainant gets the benefit of escalation in the price of the land. -3- Notice limited to the point of grant of interest to the respondent was issued. Rest of the order of the State Commission was upheld. Operation of the impugned order was stayed, subject to handing over of the possession of the house offered to the respondent within six weeks without creating any further demand except the stamp charges and registration charges. Counsel for the respondent states that the petitioner has executed lease deed of house No. II M-2/301, Rajender Nagar but the possession has not been handed over. Petitioner is directed to hand over the possession of the house to the respondent within two weeks from today. Since the respondent has been allotted the house at the old price, the direction given by the State Commission to pay the interest @ 10% is set aside. Revision petition stands disposed of in above terms. | 
