RAJ KUMAR Vs. HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners have filed this revision petition challenging the orders dated 9.1.2012 and 30.3.2011, passed by State Commission, Panchkula. It is the case of the petitioners that they filed a consumer complaint before the District Forum which was allowed in their favour, vide order dated 18.8.2006 and respondent/OP was directed to deliver the possession of Plot No. 429 in Sector-47, Gurgaon to petitioner No. 3 Further, respondent was burdened with cost of Rs 5,000.

(2.) Aggrieved by order of the District Forum, respondent filed an appeal before the State Commission. When the appeal came up for hearing on 30.3.2011, State Commission passed the following-

(3.) When the petitioners came to know about the passing of the order dated 30.3.2011, they filed an application for recall of the said order on the ground that they never authorized their Counsel to make such statement for withdrawal of the complaint Accordingly, petitioners filed an application for recall of the order However, the same was dismissed by the State Commission, vide order dated 9.1.2012 on the ground that it has no power to recall. Under these circumstances the matter require consideration Hence, issue notice of the main petition as well as application for condonation of delay to the respondent, returnable on 18.1.2013.