E SURENDER RAO Vs. NARNE ESTATES PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainants/petitioner joined Narne Estates Pvt. Ltd. for a scheme called Golden Heights Plots Scheme floated by Narne Estates Pvt. Ltd., whereunder a plot measuring 500 sq. yards was to be allotted to him for Rs. 1 lakh. The balance consideration was payable in 35 monthly instalments of Rs. 10,560/- and last instalment of Rs. 10,500/-. The plot no. 323 , measuring 500 sq. yards was allotted by the opposite party Narne Estates Pvt. Ltd. to the complainants. However, vide letter dated 13.03.2004, the allotment made to the complainant was cancelled on the ground that as per the Scheme they were to pay Rs. 10,500/- per month, but there had been no response from them. Later, the opposite party offered to restore the allotment made to the complainant subject to payment of arrears alongwith interest. Pursuant thereto, the complainants made payment of Rs. 1,96,760/- on 19.06.2004 and they also paid Rs. 22,572/- as interest on 16.7.2004. The total amount paid by the complainants, thereby reached Rs. 4,96,332/-. Thereafter, the opposite party vide letter dated 21.08.2004, changed the plot allotted to the complainants from plot no. 323 to GH 335. Vide letter dated 14.09.2004, the complainants were informed that the plot no. 323 had been sold to another person, before the said plot was restored in their names. Being aggrieved from the aforesaid act of the opposite party, the complainant approached the District Forum, seeking the following reliefs:-

(2.) The complaint was resisted by the opposite party on several grounds including that allotment of plot no. 323 in favour of the complainants was cancelled due to violation of the terms and conditions of the agreement by them. Vide order dated 30.11.2007, the District Forum gave the following directions to the opposite parties:-

(3.) Being aggrieved from the order of the District Forum, the opposite party preferred an appeal before the State Commission, which is stated to be still pending. During pendency of the appeal, the complainants/petitioners filed an application, seeking impleadment of the purchaser of plot no. 323 namely Smt. Rita Garg as respondent no. 3. The said application was dismissed by the State Commission vide impugned order dated 25.09.2013. Being aggrieved from the aforesaid order of the State Commission, the complainant filed Writ Petition No. 31320/2013 before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad. The Write Petition, however, was dismissed as not maintainable. The complainants have, therefore, now filed this revision petition assailing the order of the State Commission dated 25.09.2013.