Rajwati & Ors. vs Delhi Transport Corporation
2012 Latest Caselaw 886 Del

*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                          Decided on: 8th February, 2012

+       CM(M). No.965/2011 & CM. No.15457/2011(stay)

        RAJWATI & ORS.                            ....... Petitioners
                 Through:        Mr. Manish Maini, Advocate

                                 Versus

        DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION         ..... Respondent
                 Through: Mr. J.N. Aggarwal, Advocate


        CORAM:
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL

                           JUDGMENT

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The dispute between the parties is with regard to the rate at which the interest should be paid by the Petitioners on the amount of excess compensation refunded by it.

2. It is an admitted case of the parties that by an award dated 16.07.1998, a compensation of `5,47,000/- with interest @ 12% was granted from the date of the filing of the petition till the date of payment. The Respondent Delhi Transport Corporation preferred an Appeal before this Court being FAO No.397/1998 on the quantum of compensation. The compensation came to be reduced to `4,14,000/-. The excess amount of `1,33,000/- along

with interest was liable to be refunded to the Respondent DTC. It is not in dispute that the interest @ 12% was paid on the award amount for the period 03.08.1994 to 16.07.1998 i.e. for almost four years. The said amount of interest has to be refunded at the said rate i.e. @ 12% per annum on the principle of restitution.

3. The amount of `25,000/- was paid by the First Petitioner to the DTC on 03.05.2011 and another sum of `90,000/- was paid on 21.10.2011. It is not disputed that an amount of `18,333/- which was payable to Ritu Kaushal that is one of the Petitioners/Claimants before the Tribunal, by way of an interim compensation was not withdrawn by her. Thus, no interest was liable to be paid on this amount.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that it would be only the First Petitioner who is to reimburse the amount of interest by way of restitution. It is contended that the First Petitioner is a widow and some compassion must be shown to her. In the circumstances of the case, it is directed as under:

a) Simple interest @ 12% per annum on the amount of `1,15,000/- shall be paid for the period 03.08.1994 to

04.02.1999, when the amount along with interest was deposited in the Tribunal.

b) An interest @ 7.5% per annum shall be paid an amount of ` 1,15,000/- w.e.f. 04.02.1999 till 03.05.2011.

c) An interest @ 7.5% per annum on the amount of `90,000/-

shall be paid from 04.05.2011 till 21.10.2011.

5. The Petitioner is directed to pay the amount of interest by 10.04.2012 as prayed by the Counsel for the Petitioner, failing which the Petitioner would be liable to pay an interest @ 12% per annum throughout.

6. The Petition is disposed of in above terms.

7. Pending applications also stand disposed of.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE FEBRUARY 08, 2012 pst