ORDER K.D. Shahi, President - This is an appeal by Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority, Dehra Dun against the judgment and order dated 8.12. 1993 passed by the District Forum, Dehradun. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant had booked a flat and deposited the registration and allotment amount. The scheme was abandoned for unavoidable reasons. On 11.3.1993 the complainant himself called for his deposits which were returned to him along with 5% interest on 20.4.1993. On 17.6.1993 he filed the complaint for additional interest.' The learned Forum has allowed simple interest @ 15% from the date of deposit till 20.4.1993. 3. According to the Rule 9.10 of the brochure issued for M.D.D.A.'s Housing Schemes, those applicants, who have not been allotted houses, will be returned their registration amount without interest, if the period of deposit of such money with M.D.D.A. is less than one year. Under Rule 9.20 it is said that if the period of deposit was for a period more than one year, such applicants were entitled to get simple interest @ 5%. According to the appellant, the complainant was entitled to get 5% interest only. 4. According to the complainant in case of late deposit of any instalment the complainant was bound to pay interest@ 18%, therefore, in the case of withholding his amount the M.D.D.A. should also pay interest @ 18%. The complainant himself has alleged that he was entitled to get at least bank rate interest, which was more than 18% in those days according to his complaint allegations. 5. The question is not what was agreed in the brochure. The question is of also the harassment suffered by the complainant. He was a needy person. He must have been ambitious enough to get a house. He deposited the money in 1990 and in 1993 if he is said that you are not going to get a house because the scheme has been cancelled, he must have suffered mental pain and agony. By that time the prices of the house have also escalated. Had he applied for a fresh house, he would have waited for more than 3 years again. In these circumstances what the Forum has awarded is also inclusive of compensation. In the case of Haryana Development Authority v. Darsh Kumar1, the National Commission has held that award of 18% interest was justified. Had he applied for a fresh house, he would have waited for more than 3 years again. In these circumstances what the Forum has awarded is also inclusive of compensation. In the case of Haryana Development Authority v. Darsh Kumar1, the National Commission has held that award of 18% interest was justified. The same view has been upheld in the ruling reported in, Gwalior Development Authority v. Narendra2. The learned Counsel for the Development Authority referred the ruling reported in, Bareilly Development Authority & Anr. v. Ajai Pal Singh & Ors.3, in which it was held that an Authority is a State under the Constitution and the parties are bound by the changes in the rules, etc. The question of payment of interest was not involved in this ruling. To the contrary the case of Lucknow Development Authority v. M.K. Gupta4, it has been held that the housing construction is in the definition of service and any deficiency in service makes the Authority liable for compensation. The interest, therefore, granted is not only for the purpose of interest but is also inclusive of compensation. In this case no compensation has been separately awarded. The National Commission in a number of cases has awarded compensation up to 18% where there is deficiency in service by the Development Authority. We do not find any force in this appeal and the appeal is liable to be dismissed. ORDER The appeal is hereby dismissed. Cost of the appeal shall be easy. Appeal dismissed.