AKHTAR ABDUL KADAR BAPE Vs. ASIF CHAND SHAIKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned proxy counsel for the petitioner seeks adjournment but considering the age of the petitions which came to be filed more than seven years ago, I am not inclined to adjourn the matter and therefore, proceed to decide the revision petitions on merits.

(2.) In revision petition no. 524/2008, the complainant/respondent booked a flat bearing no. 102 on the first floor in B-Wing, measuring 600 sq. feet at Tika No. 7, CTS No. 36(1), 36(2) & 36(3), 2nd Rabodi, Thane (West), paying consideration of Rs. 10,52,000/- to the petitioner/opposite party namely Akhtar Ahmad. The opposite party/respondent however, did not deliver possession of the aforesaid flat to the complainant. Being aggrieved, he preferred a complaint before the concerned District Forum at Thane.

(3.) In revision petition no. 525/2008, the complainant booked flat no. 202 in the same complex paying a consideration of Rs.7,20,000/-. The respondent/opposite party failed to deliver possession of that flat as well to the complainant. Being aggrieved, he filed a separate complaint before the concerned District Forum.