Taken up through video conferencing.

1. This appeal relates to a builder-buyer dispute.

2. Heard learned senior counsel for the appellant builder co.

Perused the material on record, including inter alia the impugned Order dated 20.06.2019 of the State Commission and the memorandum of appeal.

3. In the interest of justice, to provide fair opportunity to the appellant builder co., to settle the matter on merit, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

4. The award made by the State Commission vide its Order of 20.06.2019 reads as below:

Based on the above assumption, the complaint is partially accepted, and the opposite party is directed to deposit the amount of the complainant i.e. Rs. 37,41,200/- with interest at the rate of 18 percent per annum from the date of deposit of money to the date of actual refund of the deposited amount along Rs. 10,000/- as cost of litigation to the complainant within 02 months.

If the Opposite Party within 02 months fails to return the complainant with interest then the complainant will be free to take recovery proceedings as per law.

5. Learned senior counsel for the appellant builder company submits, on instructions, that the appellant builder company is ready and willing to unconditionally refund the entire amount of Rs.37,41,200/- deposited by the respondent complainant with reasonable interest and pay the cost of litigation of Rs. 10,000/- awarded by the State Commission.

He further submits, on instructions, that the appellant builder company wishes to restrict and confine its appeal before this Commission only to the question of rate of interest on the amount deposited by the respondent complainant, which should be just and reasonable and not 18% per annum as awarded by the State Commission.

The submissions, made on instructions, are recorded.

6. It is noted that the prayer made in the memorandum of appeal is for setting aside the impugned Order dated 20.06.2019 of the State Commission.

7. It is further noted that vide provisional allotment letter dated 21.04.2011, the subject unit was allotted by the appellant builder company to the respondent complainant on 21.04.2011. The assured period of completion was 24 months i.e. till March 2013. The respondent complainant deposited total Rs.37,41,200/- with the appellant builder company between 29.01.2011 and 07.12.2011. The appellant builder company was not in a position to offer possession of the subject unit to the respondent complainant till the date the State Commission made its award i.e. till 20.06.2019. The appellant builder company is still not in a position to offer possession on the date of arguments on admission before this Commission i.e. on 19.03.2021.

A builder company cannot retain the amount deposited by a consumer indefinitely or unreasonably, indefinite or unreasonable holding of the amount deposited by a consumer cannot continue ad nauseam, ad infinitum.

8. Having regard to what has been summed-up above, it is deemed lawful, just, equitable and conscionable to summarily dismiss the instant first appeal no. 2019 of 2019, with liberty to the appellant builder company to file appeal, afresh, within thirty days from today, after refunding the entire amount deposited by the respondent complainant and after paying the cost of litigation, strictly restricting and confining its appeal only and only to the question of rate of inter

est on the amount deposited by the respondent complainant. 9. The Registry is requested to send a copy each of this Order to the appellant builder company and to the respondent complainant, as well as to the learned counsel for the appellant builder co., within three days from today. The stenographer is requested to upload this Order on this Commission’s website today positively.