The petitioner entered into an agreement with respondents for purchase of a flat and paid a sum of Rs.9,21,262/- after having secured loan from bank. The project was to be completed by respondents/builder within 18 months of the agreement. However, as there was no commencement of construction in the tower where the ..2.. flat was to be allotted to the petitioner, respondent offered a flat on a different location which was not acceptable to the petitioner. Petitioner accordingly sought refund of payment made by him along with interest. A complaint came to be filed by petitioner for refund of amount which was resisted by respondents/builder explaining the reasons for change of location. District forum on analysis of the pleadings of the parties while accepting complaint, directed respondents/builder to refund amount deposited by petitioner. The State Commission too having confirmed finding of the District Forum, did not find any fault with the order passed by it. Though there was a clause in the agreement authorizing respondents to make changes in the project, it did not come rescue to the respondents as it did not permit respondents to change the very complexion of the deal. The State Commission, while affirming basic finding of the District Forum, directed respondents/builder to refund deposited amount along with interest @ 9% p.a. and against this aforesaid finding the petitioner has come in revision. The principles governing award of compensation by way of interest have been laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Ghaziabad Development Authority Vs. Balbir ..3.. Singh - (2005) 9 SCC 573. In a situation like this where the builder failed to construct/offer possession of the flat allotted initially to the buyer but offered possession of a similar flat in a different location within the same project area, award of compensation by way of interest @ 9% p.a. on the deposited amount would be fully and squarely in accord with the ratio of the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court. Having considered the matter, we are of the view that the finding of the State Commission in the matter of awarding interest does not call any interference. The revision petition is dismissed accordingly.