Open iDraf
Bihar State Housing Board And Others v. Prio Ranjan Roy

Bihar State Housing Board And Others
v.
Prio Ranjan Roy

(Supreme Court Of India)

Civil Appeal No. 2719-20 Of 1997 (Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 17263-64 Of 1996) | 07-04-1997


1. Special leave granted.

2. Notice was issued on the SLPs limited to the question of compensation in the sum of Rs. 7 lakhs.

3. In regard to the sum of Rs. 7 lakhs awarded to the respondent as compensation, this is what the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission said in the order under challenge.

"We are convinced that the Board has treated the complaint in a most casual manner, the possession of the house duly allotted to the complainant was not handed over to him but given to some other person, not once but twice. Having regard to the default and unjustifiable delay and harassment caused by the Board and in the light of facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that payment of a total compensation of Rs. 7.00 lakhs to the complainant by the Board along with refund of Rs. 5260 deposited by him to the Board on various dates as per terms of allotment of house 3k 13 would meet the ends of justice." *

4. Where damages are awarded there must be an assessment thereof and the order awarding damages must contain an indication of the basis upon which the amount awarded is arrived at. There should have been some statements in the order under challenge about the relationship between the amount awarded and the default and unjustifiable delay and harassment found to have been caused

5. It is, therefore, appropriate that the matters be remanded to the National Forum so that the aspect of compensation can be considered de novo and, whatever the compensation be that is awarded, the order awarding it should set out the reasons for the same

6. It shall be open to the Forum to consider, in the process, any offer that the appellant Board may make in regard to allowable accommodation

7. We make it clear that we are not making any observation either in regard to the quantum of compensation or alternative accommodation

8. The appeals are allowed to the extent that the compensation amount of Rs. 7 lakhs awarded to the respondent is set aside. The aspect of compensation is remanded to the Forum to be considered afresh and decided upon in the light of the observations hereinabove. The matters shall be expedited before the Forum

9. No order as to costs.

Advocates List

For

For Petitioner
  • Shekhar Naphade
  • Mahesh Agrawal
  • Tarun Dua
For Respondent
  • S. Vani
  • B. Sunita Rao
  • Sushil Kumar Pathak

Bench List

HON'BLE JUSTICE K. VENKATASWAMI

HON'BLE JUSTICE S. P. BHARUCHA

Eq Citation

1997 (2) C.P.C. 430

(1997) 6 SCC 487

1997 (2) PLJR 118

LQ/SC/1997/655

HeadNote

Consumer Protection — Compensation — Assessment of damages/compensation — Basis for — Default and unjustifiable delay and harassment — Assessment of damages/compensation — Basis for — Default and unjustifiable delay and harassment — Where damages are awarded there must be an assessment thereof and the order awarding damages must contain an indication of the basis upon which the amount awarded is arrived at — There should have been some statements in the order under challenge about the relationship between the amount awarded and the default and unjustifiable delay and harassment found to have been caused — Matter remanded to the National Forum so that the aspect of compensation can be considered de novo and, whatever the compensation be that is awarded, the order awarding it should set out the reasons for the same — Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Ss. 2(1)(m) and 14