Aggrieved by the order dated 4.3.2011 passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Circuit Bench at Jaipur, (for short, the State Commission), in appeal No. 1423 of 2008, Rajasthan Housing Board has filed the present petition.  The appeal before the State Commission was also filed by the petitioner against the order dated 12.5.2008 passed by the District Forum, Bundi giving certain directions to the Housing Board.

          The petition has been filed after a delay of 78 days and an application for condonation of delay has been filed explaining the circumstances why it has not been possible for the petitioner-Board to file the petition within the prescribed period of limitation.  The application is opposed by the respondent-complainant by filing reply. 

          We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.  Having regard to circumstances shown in the application, we are inclined to exercise judicial discretion in favour of the petitioner.  We accordingly allow the application and condone the delay in filing

 the petition, subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- to the respondent.

          As regards the merits of the case, the facts and circumstances of the case, which led to the filing of the case, are amply noted in the orders of the fora below and need no repetition at our end.  The allotment of the plot made to the complainant could not fructify because the notice of demand of instalments was not received by the complainant, having been sent on wrong address.  Publication of notice was made in ‘Rajasthan Patrika’ but still the allotment was not cancelled.  The Housing Board has been directed to give possession of the allotted plot, subject to payment of the balance dues alongwith interest @12% per annum.  The aggrievement of the petitioner-Housing Board is that the direction to pay interest @12% per annum only is contrary to the policy of the Housing Board because as per the said policy, the default in payment of the monthly instalments is required to pay at least 18% interest on the amount for which he defaulted.  In this regard, our attention has been invited to the memorandum dated 6.2.2004 listing out the rate of penal interest at serial No. 5 as under:-

                             “(5)  The interest on the penalty:-

                   In the situation of not depositing the monthly instalments of the board, seed money, the dues payable prior to take the possession on time, regarding the rate of the penalty on the whole dues amount, is ascertained after deducting 20% from the present rate as similar to the rate of the penalty of the lease money.:-01

                             18%.”

In view of the above, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the State Commission has erred in directing the payment of interest @12% per annum.  On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent-complainant submits that the complainant was not at fault and was ready and willing to pay the amount and in fact had tendered the same by means of a cheque.

          Having considered the respective submission, we are of the view that it would be appropriate to modulate the relief.  In our view, once the complainant is allotted the plot on the old rate, he should not have any grudge in paying the interest for the intervening period at the prescribed rate of 18% per annum because we feel that the property must have appreciated considerably by now since the time of allotment.

          For the above reasons stated, we partly allow the revision petition.The order of State Commission shall stand modified only to the extent that the figure 12% appearing in the last paragraph of the said order shall be read as 18% per annum.  All other stipulations contained in the impugned order shall remain unaltered.        Parties to bear their own costs throughout.