URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST Vs. ANJU GUPTA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These revision petitions arise out of the single order of State Commission hence decided by common order.

(2.) These revision petitions have been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 12-09-2014 passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jaipur (in short, 'the State Commission') in Appeal Nos. 385 to 399/2012 and 406/2012 Urban Improvement Trust, Bikaner Vs. Varun Gupta & Ors. by which, while dismissing appeals filed by the petitioner, order of District Forum allowing complaints was upheld.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that complainant/respondent was allotted residential plot in the residential scheme floated by OP/petitioner. OP assured to provide facilities of road, post office, shopping mall, water and electricity, telephone, etc. OP asked complainant to deposit remaining amount of the plot, failing which, security amount will be forfeited; though, facilities were not provided by the OP. Alleging deficiency on the part of OP, complainant filed complaint for direction not to forfeit the security amount and pay compensation as mentioned in the complaint. OP resisted complaint and denied that development work has not been carried out and prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District Forum after hearing both the parties, allowed complaints and directed OP to return deposited amount along with 9% p.a. interest. Appeal filed by the OP was dismissed by learned State Commission vide order dated 02-07-2012 against which revision petitions filed by the petitioner were allowed by order dated 23-07-2014 and cases were remanded back to learned State Commission to decide appeals by speaking order after giving an opportunity of being heard to the parties. Learned State Commission vide impugned order in the absence of parties, dismissed appeals against which these revision petitions have been filed.