IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP NO.10729 of 2007 Decided on : 31.10.2008 Sarghi Kala Kender ....Petitioner VERSUS PUDA & others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH Present:- Mr. Ranjivan Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B. S. Dhillon, AAG, Punjab for respondent Nos.1 & 2 Mr. R. S. Khosla, Advocate for respondent No.3. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M. M. KUMAR J. The petitioner has approached this Court with a number of prayers. It is pertinent to notice that it was allotted a plot measuring 1290 sq. yards under the category of cultural site. The petitioner-Kender was found ineligible and consequently allotment made to it by issuing letter of intent dated 26.02.2002 (Annexure P-6) was cancelled vide order dated 05.09.2003 (Annexure P-9). When the matter came up for consideration on 20.07.2007, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for some time to seeks instructions whether the petitioner-Kender was interested in restricting the prayer only CWP NO.10729 of 2007 -2- to the payment of interest. On 02.08.2007, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner-Kender was ready to accept its claim qua interest only. Accordingly, notice of motion was issued to the respondents limited to the point of interest. Therefore, the only question raised before us is whether the petitioner is entitle to payment of interest on the amount of Rs.2,78,010/- deposited by it on 21.05.2002 till the date of its refund which was made on 25.11.2003. In fact, on 18.11.2003, the petitioner had represented to the respondents for withdrawing the letter dated 23.12.2002 (Annexure P-7) which had been annulled vide letter dated 26.02.2002 (Annexure P-6) or in the alternative, the amount deposited by the petitioner-Kender be refunded. It is not disputed that the petitioner- Kender had been deprived of the use of its money withheld by the respondent No.3 for a period of approximately one and a half year i.e. from 21.05.2002 to 25.11.2003. Mr. Ranjivan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, has vehemently argued that on the one hand the petitioner had been deprived of allotment of plot for holding its cultural activities and developing a cultural Kender and on the other hand, the respondents are not even paying compensation in the form of interest for illegal deprivation of the use of money withheld by respondent No.3. He has submitted that the petitioner- Kender is entitle to payment of interest @ 15% per annum from the date of amount was paid i.e. on 21.05.2002 till the date the amount was refunded on 25.11.2003. Mr. R. S. Khosla, learned counsel for respondent No.3, has however, submitted that no interest is leviable on such an amount because a CWP NO.10729 of 2007 -3- number of cases where an applicant does not succeeds, then no interest is paid. He has drawn our attention to the clauses in the brochure (Annexure P-2). After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that the limited prayer made by the petitioner deserves acceptance because the petitioner has been a successful applicant and a letter of intent was issued to the petitioner-Kender on 26.02.2002. On the basis of the letter of intent, the petitioner-Kender deposited a sum of Rs.3,23,010/- and on 21.05.2002, Rs.2,78,010/- which represented 25% of the tentative price. However, the allotment made to the petitioner-Kender was cancelled and the amount was refunded after about one and a half year on 25.11.2003. According to the provision made in the brochure, if the amount is retained beyond the period of six months then interest @ 10% per annum is payable by respondent No.3. The afore-mentioned clause of the brochure reads as under:- “Refund of Application Money In all cases, processing fee of Rs.5000/- shall be deducted. In case of successful applicants the balance amount of Rs.45,000/- will be adjusted towards the first installment of 25% of the price. In case of unsuccessful applicants a sum of Rs.45,000/- shall be refunded within 180 days of the date of finalization of selection process. In case this amount is retained beyond a period of 180 days, interest will be paid @ 10% per annum for the period beyond 180 days. If a successful applicant fails to deposit 25% of the price within 90 days and fails to complete CWP NO.10729 of 2007 -4- the requisite formalities, his entire application money of Rs.50,000/- shall be forfeited.” The afore-mentioned provision does not deal with the type of situation in hand. It only deals with unsuccessful applicants or those successful applicants who fail to deposit 25% of the consideration amount within the stipulated period of 90 days. In the present case, the petitioner- Kender has deposited 25% of the amount within the stipulated period of 90 days from the date of issuance of letter of intent. Therefore, no fault can be found with the petitioner-Kender and the amount has been illegally retained by respondent No.3. For the reasons afore-mentioned, this petition succeeds. The respondent No.3 is directed to pay interest to the petitioner-Kender @ 10% per annum on the amount deposited by the petitioner-Kender from the date of deposit i.e. 21.05.2002 till the date of refund on 25.11.2003. The needful shall be done within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (M. M. Kumar) Judge (Jora Singh) Judge October 31, 2008 ashish