UMESH KUMAR vs Improvement Trust Rupnagar

THIS Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner against order dated 30.8.2012 passed by Learned State Commission in First Appeal No. 307 of 2011 - Umesh Kumar Vs. The Improvement Trust, Rupnagar, by which while dismissing both the appeals, order of the District Forum allowing refund of some amount was upheld.

BRIEF facts of the case are that Complainant/Petitioner purchased a built up Booth No. 3 from Opposite Party/Respondent in open auction and deposited ¼ amount and remaining ¾ amount was to be paid in five equal half -yearly instalments alongwith interest. Complainant could not pay first two instalments of Rs. 1,10,100/ - each with interest due to knee replacement of his mother. It was, further, submitted that, later on he submitted cheque of depositing amount which was returned after taking long time from the competent authority which delayed in payment of amount. Later on, Opposite Party asked Complainant to pay Rs. 5,09,155/ - by charging the interest @ 12% against 6% p.a. and Complainant sent cheque of Rs. 4,10,252/ - dated 3.2.2010. Later on, Complainant deposited amount under protest. Alleging deficiency on the part of Opposite Party, Complainant filed complaint for refund of excess amount of Rs. 74,232/ - with 18% p.a. interest and demanded Rs. 50,000/ - as compensation. Opposite Party resisted complaint and submitted that District Forum had no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and further reiterated that demand made by Opposite Party was correct and no excess amount was deposited by the Complainant and prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District Forum, after hearing both the parties, allowed complaint partly and directed Opposite Party to refund Rs. 41,969/ - with 9% p.a. interest from the date of deposit till date of payment and further allowed Rs. 1,000/ - as cost. Appeals filed by both the parties were dismissed by Learned State Commission against which this Revision Petition has been filed.

HEARD Authorised Representative for the Petitioner and Learned Counsel for the Respondent finally at admission stage and perused record. Authorised Representative for the Petitioner submitted that Petitioner was liable to pay interest only @ 6% p.a. on default of instalments and Learned District Forum wrongly calculated refundable amount after charging 12% p.a. interest and Learned State Commission, further, committed error in dismissing appeal, hence, Revision Petition be allowed and Rs. 24,593/ - may, further, be refunded. On the other hand, Learned Counsel for Respondent submitted that order passed by Learned State Commission is in accordance with law, hence, Revision Petition be dismissed.

PERUSAL of record reveals that Learned State Commission rightly calculated refundable amount after charging 12% p.a. interest as per agreement and rightly reduced refundable amount. Authorised Representative for the Petitioner submitted that as per Land Disposal Rules, which were adopted by Respondent, the Petitioner was not liable to pay interest more than 6% p.a. This argument is devoid of force because parties are bound by the terms & conditions of the agreement and as per agreement, 12% p.a. interest was payable.

I do not find any illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order and Revision Petition is liable to be dismissed.

CONSEQUENT LY , Revision Petition filed by the Petitioner is dismissed at admission stage with no order as to costs.