1 MAT 21 of 2024 with MAT 22 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present: The Hon’ble Justice Debangsu Basak And The Hon’ble Justice Md. Shabbar Rashidi MAT 21 of 2024 with IA No.: CAN 2 of 2024 The West Bengal Housing Board & Ors. Vs. Raj Kumar Agarwal & Anr. With MAT 22 of 2024 with IA No.: CAN 2 of 2024 The West Bengal Housing Board & Ors. Vs. Naresh Kumar Agarwal & Anr. For the Appellants : Mr. Ayan Chakraborty, Advocate Mr. Dhilon Sengupta, Advocate For the respondent no.1/writ petitioner: Mr. Rajarshi Dutta, Advocate in MAT 21 of 2024 and MAT 22 of 2024 Mr. Tanish Ganeriwala, Advocate Mr. Anirudhya Dutta, Advocate For the State in MAT 21 of 2024 : Mr. Gaurav Das, Advocate Ms. Rajyashree Mukherjee, Advocate For the State in MAT 22 of 2024 : Mr. Jayanta Samanta, Jr. Govt. Advocate Mr. Kazi Sajjad Alam, Advocate 2 MAT 21 of 2024 with MAT 22 of 2024 Heard & Judgment on : April 25, 2025 DEBANGSU BASAK, J.:- 1. Two appeals are taken up for analogous hearing as they involve the same issues. 2. Two Appeals are at the behest of the West Bengal Housing Board and directed against the two orders dated May 3, 2023 passed in WPA 22786 of 2010 and May 3, 2023 passed in WPA 22785 of 2010. 3. Learned Advocate appearing for the appellants submits that, the appellants became aware of a fake allotment of plots by one of its employee. Immediately upon discovery of such scam, appellants called upon persons who were affected to produce relevant records and to take refund of the payments made. Private respondents/writ petitioners did not take the refund. 4. Learned Advocate appearing for the appellants submits that, therefore, learned Trial Judge erred in awarding interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from date of receipt of payment by the appellants till the date of disbursement thereof. He submits that, the appellants offered to make payment which the private respondents did not accept. Therefore, the appellants could not be saddled with any interest. 5. State and the private respondents are represented. 3 MAT 21 of 2024 with MAT 22 of 2024 6. Learned Advocate appearing for the private respondents submits that, pursuant to an interim order of the High Court, even the principal amount was not refunded. 7. We find from the records that, the private respondents applied for allotment for a plot of land. Private respondents deposited the requisite money with the appellants. 8. Appellants acknowledged that, the private respondents deposited amount for allotment of a plot of land with it. Such deposit was made in 2005. Appellants claims that subsequent to the discovery of the scam private respondents were informed to obtain the money which the private respondents did not do. 9. It appears from the records that, the private respondents approached the Writ Court seeking allotment instead of accepting the money. Such writ petitions were disposed of by the impugned orders directing refund of the money along with the interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of deposit till the date of refund. 10. We do not find any ground to interfere with the discretion exercised by the learned Single Jude in awarding interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of deposit till the date of refund. 11. Admittedly, appellants received the money. Admittedly, appellants are still continuing to hold on to such money of the writ petitioners. The nature of the transaction obviously is commercial between the appellants and the private respondents. Appellants as trustees of the 4 MAT 21 of 2024 with MAT 22 of 2024 money of the private respondents are obliged to refund the same along with accrued interest. 12. In such circumstances, we find no merit in the present appeals. 13. MAT 21 of 2024 and MAT 22 of 2024 along with all connected applications are disposed of without any order as to costs. (Debangsu Basak, J.) 14. I agree. (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.) (AD)