Despite service, no one has put in appearance on behalf of the Respondent/Complainant.  Accordingly, I have heard learned counsel for the Appellant, Lucknow Development Authority (for short “the Authority”).

            Short grievance of the Appellant is that the Authority, having itself offered to refund the entire amount deposited by the Respondent, i.e., Rs.6,91,700/- with interest @ 9%, the State Commission was not justified in directing the refund of the said amount with interest @ 12% per annum along with damages quantified at Rs.2 lakh.

            Having heard learned counsel for the Appellant and bearing in mind the fact that the amount deposited by the Respondent was offered to be refunded to her after 7 years of the deposit, award of interest @ 12% per annum does not appear to be unreasonable.  However, as there was substantial delay on the part of the Respondent in filing the Complaint, in my opinion, the award of damages in her favour was not justified.

            Consequently, the Appeal is allowed partly and the impugned order is set aside to the extent of award of damages.  Rest of the directions in the impugned order are maintained.

            The Appeal stands disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs.