B.L.GOYAL vs G.D.A.

THE complainant applied to Ghaziabad Development Authority for allotment of a house in Vaishali Housing Scheme in December 1988. THE complainant on 10th January, 1989 applied for registration of house and paid Rs. 31,10.00 as required by a Bank Draft dated 7th January, 1989. THE total cost of such a house was mentioned in the Brochure as Rs. 3,10,000/- Rs. 31,000/- was to be paid as reservation fee within 30 days of the date of reservation. In the first week of February 1990, the complainant received a letter from opposite party No. 1 acknowledging receipt of Rs. 62000/- as registration and reservation amount for Rachana Section of Vaishali Housing Scheme. On 28th September, 1990 the Complainant received a letter from opposite party No. 1 informing him that the instalment be paid by the complainant. By Annexure 5 of the Complaint a sum of Rs. 5,038.00 and sum of Rs. 4,650.00 has been claimed by way of interest. On receipt of the said letter namely Annexure 5 the Complainant paid Rs. 1,24,000/- as payment of both the first and second instalment to the opposite parties by Bank draft on the Oriental Bank of Commerce. THE complainant by Annexure 6 of the complaint dated 11th October, 1990 protested against the claim made by opposite party No. 1 for interest. THE Complaint of the Complainant is that inspite of the objections raised in regard to claim for interest the opposite parties did not give any reply.

THE contention of the Appellant is that the claim in regard to interest is untenable. It has come on record that the Complainant has paid all the instalments in respect of the house. The complaint was contested by the Ghaziabad Development Authority. On the date of hearing Counsel for Ghaziabad Development Authority made a statement that possession of the house shall be given to the Complainant by 31st May, 1993. On this statement being made the Complainant prayer in regard to possession over the house stands granted.

It was next contended that the opposite party No. 1 is entitled from complainant price of the house as it obtains on the date of possession to the Complainant. This contention was opposed by the Complainant by contending that since all the instalments representing the price of the house have already been paid the opposite party is not entitled to enhance the price on the date on which the possession is to be delivered to the Complainant.

AFTER having considered the points raised by the parties. We are of the view that since the conditions required to be fulfilled have been observed and completed opposite party No. 1 is not entitled to enhance the price of house. The question that now arises is whether the opposite party is entitled to interest amounting to Rs. 5,038.00 and Rs. 4,650.00 as interest for delay in payment of first instalment. On this aspect we have heard the parties. The facts are that registration amount of Rs. 31,000/- and fee of Rs. 10 /- were paid by the Complainant alongwith the application. In the instant case the application was made in the month of September or October, 1989. The Complainant paid registration amount and fee of Rs. 10/- on demand made by the opposite party No. 1. The opposite party was unable to point out to us on what basis it was claiming interest. The legal position is that interest may be claimed prior to the institution of the case if there is an agreement to that effect. Interest is also payable if the sum is payable under some usage of trade or under any provision of substantive law.

WE have heard the parties on this point. The opposite party was unable to point out as to how interest is claimable by them. The record indicated that the amount was paid when the Complainant was assured about the allotment of house. The instalment would be payable only when the Complainant is assured of allotment of the house. In the absence of any condition in regard to claim of interest the opposite party No. 1 is not entitled to claim interest, which has been claimed from the Complainant. It is to be noticed that when the Complainant protested that he is not liable to pay interest the opposite party did not indicate any reason for doing so. The claim for interest at this stage is not entertainable. As a matter of fact, the opposite party could cancel the allotment if there was delay in making any payment but once the instalment were accepted it does not lie in the mouth of the opposite party to claim interest afterwards. For reasons stated above, I hold the complainant is not liable to pay interest as claimed by the opposite party No. 1. On the findings as recorded above, the Complaint is allowed and the opposite party No. 1 is directed, to deliver possession over the house allotted to him by 3.5.1993 without laying claim to any further amount.

THE Complaint is decided in the manner indicated above. Complaint allowed.