NCDRC

NCDRC

OP/224/1997

HINDUSTAN FERTILISERS CORPN. LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - Opp.Party(s)

G. JOSHI

05 May 2010

ORDER

Date of Filing: 01 Oct 1997

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHICONSUMER CASE NO. No. OP/224/1997
1. HINDUSTAN FERTILISERS CORPN. LTD.REG OFF AT -MADHUBAN 55, NEHRU PLACE NEW DELHI ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYVIKAS BHAWAN , VIKAS PATH GHAZIABAD U.P ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. GUPTA ,PRESIDING MEMBERHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. BATTA ,MEMBER
For the Appellant :NEMO
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 05 May 2010
ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

By the order dated 16.7.2007, the complaint was disposed of with the following direction:- “In the result, for the reasons stated above, it is directed that the GDA shall not levy non-construction charges from 1.4.1992 till the date of execution of lease deed and also the period during which the complaint remained pending before this Commission, i.e. from 1.10.1997 till the date of the decision. Further, option is given to the GDA to take back the possession after refunding the entire amount deposited by the complainant with interest at the rate of 12% (the complainant has claimed interest at the rate of 24%) from the date of the deposit till the date of payment. The option shall be exercised within four weeks from the date of the receipt of the order. Otherwise, the option will not remain in force.………….” Pursuant to the said order, the opposite Party-Authority exercised option to take back the possession of plot and refund the amount deposited with interest at the said rate of 12% p.a. Shri Devesh Kumar states that the principal amount of Rs. 43,88,736/- deposited by the complainant was refunded by the opposite party – Authority on 15.12.2005 to the complainant. Interest up to 14.12.2005 on this amount had also been paid. Alongwith reply to the execution application, calculation sheet has been filed. Shri Saxena, on the other hand, contends that complainant is entitled to interest beyond what has been paid by the Authority. It appears that at the time aforeorder was passed, it was not brought to the notice of the Commission that the principal amount had been refunded on 15.12.2005 even before passing of that order. In our view, the complainant is entitled to interest only up to 14.12.2005 as the principal amount of Rs. 43,88,736/- was paid to the complainant on 15.12.2005. Thus, no further amount remains to be paid by the opposite party – Authority towards interest. Execution application is, therefore, struck off as fully satisfied.


......................JK.S. GUPTAPRESIDING MEMBER
......................JR.K. BATTAMEMBER