Respondent is not present despite service of notice.

Petitioner was opposite party before the District Forum.  Complainant-respondent deposited Rs.3,000/- in the year 1981 as registration money for the allotment of a house in LIG Scheme.  He was allotted a house and was placed at serial No. 49 of the waiting list in the draw of lots.  Subsequently, a further sum of Rs.2,000/- was deposited by the respondent in the year 1985.  Another deposit of Rs.15020/- was made by the respondent in the year 1996.  He got his registration transferred from Bareilly to Lucknow.  He was allotted house No. 2A/263 in Brindavan Scheme on the basis of draw of lots held on 8.7.2001 as per his consent contained in letter dated 25.5.2001.  Subsequent to that, another alternative offer of accommodation was made by the petitioner at the prevailing price and not at the original price.

Aggrieved by this, complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum.  District Forum allowed the complaint with a direction to the respondent to refund the amount of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @17% from the date of its deposit till the date of realisation.

Petitioner being aggrieved filed the appeal before the State Commission, which has been dismissed by the impugned order. 

We agree with the view taken by the State Commission that the petitioner was not justified in offering an alternative accommodation to the respondent at the prevalent price.  Fora below have directed the petitioner to refund the amount deposited by him alongwith interest @17% p.a.  Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner had already refunded the principal amount of Rs.20,000/- alongwith interest i.e. Rs.9,000/- @ 6% p.a. from the date of deposit till the date of payment.

In the case of Ghaziabad Development Authority vs. Balbir Singh  2004(5) SCC 65, Hon’ble Supreme Court had awarded interest @18% in cases where allotment was not made.  Later on, Supreme Court in Haryana Urban Development Authority vs. Darsh Kumar 2005(9) SCC 449 held that interest should be paid @12% from the date of deposit till realisation.  Respectfully following the view taken by the Supreme Court in Darsh Kumar (supra), we reduce the rate of interest from 17% to 12 %.  Petitioner is directed to pay the balance amount of interest within eight weeks from today, failing which, the petitioner shall be liable to pay interest @18% p.a. from respective dates of deposit till the date of payment.

The revision petition is disposed of accordingly.