MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, FARIDABAD Vs. RENU GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed against an order dated 16.06.2011 passed by Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchkula ( in short, the State Commission) in First Appeal no. 775 of 2011. Vide the impugned order, the State Commission had confirmed the order of the District Forum dated 09.12.2010, whereby the complaint of the complainant / respondent was accepted and following directions were issued:

(2.) The appeal of the petitioner vide the impugned order was dismissed on merits as well as on the ground that it was barred by limitation. Counsel while arguing the matter has not pressed the argument on the limitation but has argued that impugned order whereby the appeal was dismissed on merit, suffers with illegality and vital facts were not taken into consideration and, therefore, impugned order is liable to be set aside. It is argued that findings of the Fora below that there was a sewerage line underneath the shop is a wrong finding and there was only a service connection. On behalf of the respondent, it is argued that there is concurrent finding of fact that at the time when the subject property was put to auction by the petitioner, they had concealed the material facts relating to the existence of the sewerage line underneath the shop and also misrepresented about the size, condition and location of the shop. It is submitted that this Commission has no jurisdiction to re-assess and re-appreciate the evidence led before the Fora below and cannot substitute its own opinion on the findings of the facts.

(3.) We have given our thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions.