- (1.) Leave granted. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission('NCDRC') by a Judgment and Order dated 11 December, 2017 disposed of a batch of appeals arising from a decision rendered on 5 December, 2016 by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ('SCDRC'). Finding the appellants in default of their obligations to the flat purchasers, the SCDRC directed the appellants to pay compensation. The relevant part of the directions is extracted below : "(iii) To pay compensation, by way of interest @ 12% p.a., on the deposited amount, to the complainant(s), from 07.01.2014 in respect of Complaint No.508/2016 and from the respective dates as given in Column No.5 in Table - A in respect of eight complaints indicated therein, till 30.11.2016, within 45 days, from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, failing which, the said amount (s) shall carry penal interest @ 15% p.a.,instead of 12% p.a., from the date of default, till realization. (iv) To pay compensation by way of interest @ 12% p.a. on the deposited amounts, to the complainant(s) w.e.f. 01.12.2016, onwards (per month), till possession is delivered, by the 10th of the following month, failing which, the same shall also carry penal interest @ 15% p.a., instead of 12% p.a., from the date of default, till payment is made. (v) Pay compensation, in the sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- on account of mental agony, physical harassment and deficiency in service, and Rs. 35,000/- as litigation costs, to the complainant(s), within 45 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order, failing which, the said amount(s) shall carry interest @ 12% p.a., from the date of filing the complaint(s) till realization."
(2.) In appeal, the NCDRC reduced the rate of interest from 12 per cent to 9 per cent.
(3.) The grievance of the appellants is that while reducing the rate of interest, the NCDRC extended the period over which interest is liable to be paid. As a result, the liability in monetary terms under the impugned order of NCDRC is stated to be higher than under the directions of the SCDRC, despite the reduction in the rate of interest. The SCDRC, in the submission of the appellants, distinguished between those flat buyers who were seeking possession and those who were seeking a refund of monies. For those who were seeking possession, interest was made payable by the SCDRC from the anticipated date of possession, whereas the NCDRC, according to the appellants, has obliterated the distinction between those who sought possession and those who were seeking refund of their monies.;