DINBANDHU BHUMI VIKAS SANSTHA Vs. KISHOR ISHWAR PEKDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. J. C. Shukla, Advocate for the appellants in all the appeals. None is present on behalf of the respondents although it is stated duly served. The appeals were moved before us for admission on 23rd September, 2002 when we issued notice before admission to the respondent in all the three appeals making it returnable today. The Hamdast was granted to the appellants Advocate to serve. Mr. Shukla who appears for the appellants states that respondents have been duly served. Thus being aware of today's returnable date of the appeals for admission hearing, respondents have not chosen to remain present.

(2.) As we noticed there is an apparent error on face of the record, on examination of the material made available before us on the part of the District Forum in not perusing and adverting to the material documents. Copies whereof have been made available to us namely Debit Vouchers issued by the complainants in respect of the amounts of claim in question being the subject matter of the complaints herein evidencing refund of the amounts to the complainants in respect of which the District Forum has passed the order for refund.

(3.) The appellants herein are the original O. Ps. in the aforesaid complaints and the respondents are the original complainants. (Hereinafter for brevity's sake appellants are referred to as "sanstha" duly registered under Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 and the respondents are "plot Purchasers" ).