KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
APPEAL No. 108/2014
JUDGMENT DATED: 16.10.2018
(Against the order in C.C. 130/2011 of CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram)
PRESENT :
HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI. S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN : PRESIDENT
SMT. BEENA KUMARY. A : MEMBER
APPELLANTS:
- Kerala State Housing Board, Thiruvananthapuram by its Secretary, Housing Board Building, Santhi Nagar, Thiruvananthapuram-695 001.
- The Chief Engineer, Kerala State Housing Board, Santhi Nagar, Thiruvananthapuram-695 001.
(By Adv. C.R. Meena)
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
T.S. John, Thazhompadickal, Plot No. 7, Tilak Nagar, Nalanchira (P.O), Thiruvananthapuram-15.
(By Adv. Rajmohan. C.S)
JUDGMENT
HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI. S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN : PRESIDENT
Opposite parties in C.C No. 130/2011 on the file of Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Thiruvananthapuram, for short, the district forum, have filed this appeal challenging the Order passed by the forum directing them to pay a sum of Rs. 1,69,270/- with 10% interest from 15.12.1997 to the complainant.
2. The dispute involved in the complaint case pertains to refund of excess amount collected from the complainant, an allottee of a plot by the opposite parties, which was subsequently realized after allotment made pursuant to enhancement of land value payable to the land owners, from whom the land was taken over by the Housing Board, in LAR proceedings. It is an admitted fact that judgment passed by the land acquisition reference court was modified in appeal by the government on behalf of the Board reducing the enhanced compensation ordered. In the light of the appellate court judgment excess amount collected from the allottees required to be refunded by the Housing Board. The lower forum appreciating the rival case presented by the parties in which the essential and fundamental factor that refund of excess amount collected was due to the complainant was not a matter in dispute, ordered the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs. 1,69,270/- with 10% interest to the complainant. Appeal is directed against that Order in which also there is no challenge or dispute over the entitlement of the complainant to receive refund but only for modifying the order on the ground of extenuating circumstances, which, according to the appellant would relieve them from the liability to pay interest on the refund allowed to the complainant. Appellants have also filed an affidavit by its executive engineer in which it is averred among other things that the amount due as refund is much less than the sum fixed and awarded by the lower forum. According to the appellants, the amount due as refund was only 1,52,032/- and the lower forum by mistake in calculating the sum of refund has also included some amount collected towards effecting transfer of the property and other incidental expenses. Taking note of the affidavit filed by the appellants we have asked the respondent/complainant, who was present in person, whether he is amenable to receive the sum of Rs. 1,52,032/- suggested by the appellant as the sum payable as refund, to which he responded positively but insisting for payment of the sum with reasonable interest. Appeal was thereafter adjourned directing counsel for appellants to ascertain from her clients as to what rate of interest they are prepared to refund the sum from the date fixed by the lower forum.
3. Appeal coming up for hearing again before this Commission. The learned counsel for the appellants urged for relieving the appellants from payment of interest on the sum fixed as payable, that is Rs. 1,52,032/-, submitting that the complainant is not the original allottee. Though the enhanced compensation ordered was modified and revised in appeal the land owners had initiated collateral proceedings and steps taken by the Board to recover enhanced compensation already paid by them, could not be realized so far, according to counsel. We find the circumstance canvassed as above by the appellants would not relieve them from paying refund due to the complainant especially whether they have collected additional sum from them on enhancement of compensation subsequent to the order of the land acquisition reference court and that too with interest. There can be no doubt that refund amount was due to the allottee or his assignee from the date amount of refund was due, that is from 15.12.1997. Housing Board has to pay the refund amount with reasonable interest till satisfaction. Though we agree and accept the sum suggested by the Housing Board for refund as Rs. 1,52,032/-, modifying the order of the lower forum fixed at Rs. 1,69,270/-, we make it clear the above amount of refund shall be paid with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from 15.12.1997 till payment and realisation.
4. Order of the lower forum is modified as above with direction to the appellants to pay sum of refund as fixed above with interest as ordered within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment failing which the amount of refund, i.e, Rs. 1,52,032/- thereafter will carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum till satisfaction.
5. Sum deposited by the appellants Rs. 25,000/- to entertain their appeal shall be refunded to the respondent/complainant, on his application before this Commission. That amount shall be given credit to in the sum payable to him.
Appeal is partly allowed directing both sides to suffer their costs.
JUSTICE S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN : PRESIDENT
jb BEENA KUMARY. A : MEMBER
