Haryana Urban Development Authority vs Shital Parshad Jain

The Supreme Court held that interest at the rate of 18% per annum cannot be uniformly granted in consumer cases, emphasizing that compensation must correlate with actual loss or injury as per the guidelines established in Ghaziabad Development Authority vs. Balbir Singh (2004) 5 SCC 65. The Court found gross deficiency in service regarding the allotment of a plot and upheld the State Forum's decision to reduce the interest rate to 12% and compensation for mental agony to Rs. 5,000, while clarifying that the order should not serve as a precedent for future cases. The Court ultimately decided not to interfere with the State Forum's order due to lack of material evidence for different interest rates at the relevant time.