The term compensation used in statutes including under section 71 of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act 2016 includes award of interest.
Thus, keeping in view the said principle laid down in the aforesaid judgment, the amount of the interest is the compensation to the beneficiary deprived of the use of the investment made by the complainant.
DLF HOMES PANCHKULA PVT. LTD vs. D.S. DHANDA, ETC.ETC.
Section 71 of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act 2016 empowers only the adjudicating officers to award compensation. As per the rulings of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, interest and damages is also compensation. Hence, those complaints which are filed under section 31 of the RERA Act, 2016 demanding refund plus interest should only be adjudicated by the Adjudicating Officers and not by the Chairperson and members of the RERA. The refund plus interest orders passed by the RERA so far are without jurisdiction hence, null and void.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a judgment reported as Secretary, Irrigation Department, Government of Orissa & Others vs. G.C. Roy [(1992) 1 SCC 508] examined the question as to whether an arbitrator has the power to award interest pendente lite. It was held that a person deprived of use of money to which he is legitimately entitled has a right to be compensated for the deprivation which may be called interest, compensation or damages. Thus, keeping in view the said principle laid down in the aforesaid judgment, the amount of the interest is the compensation to the beneficiary deprived of the use of the investment made by the complainant. Therefore, such interest will take into its ambit, the consequences of delay in not handing over his possession.
The above observation and analogy comes from recent decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the