HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. GIANI RAM AGGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Delay of two days in filing this Revision Petition is condoned.

(2.) Findings recorded by the fora below are findings of fact based on evidence, which do not require interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. Under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the National Commission, in revision, can interfere with the orders only if it appears that the Authority below has exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law or has failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested or has acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.

(3.) We find no error/irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction by the State Commission in its impugned order. Dismissed. Petition dismissed.