Complainant, petitioner, herein, had filed a complaint before the District Forum with the allegation that the petitioner was allotted a plot by the HUDA, respondent. He deposited a sum of Rs.97,305/-. According to him as the area of the plot allotted to him was not developed, he was not delivered the possession. He applied for surrender of the plot by filing an application on 04.06.01. Respondent refunded a sum of Rs.99,940/- after deducting 10% of the total price of the plot. This was as per policy decision. The District Forum upheld the order passed by the HUDA to the extent that it had the right to deduct 10% of the total price of the plot as per policy decision but awarded interest to the complainant on the remaining amount of Rs.99,940/- @12% p.a. from the date of deposit till its realisation. Respondent was further directed to pay interest on the same rate to the petitioner on the amount of interest which had become due after the date of payment of Rs.99,940/-. Aggrieved by the order passed by the District Forum, respondent HUDA filed an appeal before the State Commission, which has been accepted by the impugned order. The State Commission has held that the District Forum after recording a finding that there was no deficiency in service and that the HUDA was entitled to deduct 10% of the total price of the plot, could not award interest @12% on the remaining amount as there was no deficiency in service on the part of HUDA. For coming to this conclusion, the State Commission relied upon certain judgements of this Commission and of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in which it has been held that interest could be awarded only in a case where there is deficiency in service. We agree with the view taken by the State Commission. Since there was no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent HUDA, the respondent could not be directed to pay interest on the refund amount. Dismissed.
......................JASHOK BHANPRESIDENT
......................B.K. TAIMNIMEMBER | | 
