Adarshdeep Singh v. Ut Of Chandigarh & ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-12806-2016 (O&M) Date of decision:- 18.07.2017 Adarshdeep Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

U.T., Chandigarh through Home Secretary, Chandigarh Administration, U.T. Secretariat, 4th Floor, Sector 9, Chandigarh and others.

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU Present:- Mr. Vivek Goyal, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Deepali Puri, Advocate, for the respondents.

* * * * S.J. VAZIFDAR, C.J. (ORAL) The petitioner has challenged the levy of interest by the respondents. The matter is in fact extremely simple. The respondents appear to have calculated interest on the wrong basis and on the wrong amounts.

2.

The third and the last installment of
19,07,960/- was payable by the petitioner on 17.05.2013. It is true that an amount of
 3,24,500/- and
 3,00,000/- had been paid on 11.06.2015 and 15.03.2016. However, what the respondents appear to have forgotten and not taken into consideration is the fact that against the first and the second installments, the petitioner had paid amounts far in excess of what he was required to. Qua the first installment of
19,07,960/- payable on 17.05.2012, the petitioner had paid
 43,00,000/-. Against the second installment of the same amount, the petitioner was, therefore, not required to pay any amount at all. However, on 01.08.2012 and 18.08.2012, the petitioner paid an amount of Amodh Sharma 2017.07.21 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CWP-12806-2016 (O&M)
6,00,000/- and
2,00,000/- respectively. Thus, even as per the respondents as on 17.05.2013 i.e. the due date for the third installment, the petitioner had already paid an amount in excess of
12,84,080/-. The petitioner was entitled to credit for this amount. The fact that an amount of
 3,24,500/- and
 3,00,000/- was paid against the third installment on 11.06.2015 and 15.03.2016 makes no difference to the petitioner's entitlement to the credit of the excess amount paid upto that date. Interest cannot be charged on the excess amount paid by the petitioner against the earlier installments. The respondents would only be entitled to levy interest on the shortfall i.e. the reducing balance. Thus, for instance, for the period 17.05.2012 till 11.06.

2015 on which date
3,24,500/- was paid, the respondents would be entitled to interest only on the difference between
 19,07,960/- and
 12,84,080/-. Thereafter, the respondents would be entitled to levy interest for the period 11.06.2015 to 15.03.2016 i.e. the date on which
3,00,000/- was paid only on the amount of
19,07,960/- less the amounts of
12,84,080/- and
3,24,500/-. 3.

The respondents shall calculate the amounts due, if any, accordingly and inform the petitioner. In the event of any excess amount having been paid, the same shall be refunded to the petitioner within four weeks of the computation failing which the same shall carry interest at 15% per annum. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. (S.J. VAZIFDAR) CHIEF JUSTICE (HARINDER SINGH SIDHU) JUDGE 18.07.2017 Amodh Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No
Amodh Sharma 2017.07.21 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh