RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD vs Arjun Singh Chaudhary

THIS revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 8.8.2014 passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bench No. 1, Jaipur (in short, ''the State Commission'') in Appeal No. 720 of 2014 Rajasthan Housing Board and Ors. Vs. Arjun Singh Chaudhary by which, while dismissing appeal, order of District Forum allowing complaint was upheld.

BRIEF facts of the case are that Complainant/Respondent applied for allotment of flat in HIG category and deposited registration fee in draw of lottery. He was declared successful, he deposited money and possession letter was issued to him with additional payment of Rs.2,35,207/ - including Rs.5453/ - as interest. It was further submitted that possession letter was issued without providing basic facilities. Material of bathroom was very inferior. Alleging deficiency on the part of OP, complainant filed complaint before District Forum. OP resisted complaint. Learned District Forum after hearing both the parties allowed complaint and directed OP to pay interest @ 10% p.a. on Rs.21,40,000/ - and same interest on Rs.58,247/ - and further directed to pay Rs.35,000/ - as compensation on account of mental agony and Rs.5,000 - as cost of litigation. Appeal filed by OP was dismissed by learned State Commission vide impugned order against which, this revision petition has been filed along with application for condonation of delay.

HEARD learned Counsel for the parties and perused record. As there is delay of only 4 days in filing revision petition, delay stands condoned.

LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submitted that impugned order is not a speaking order and has not considered grounds taken in memo of appeal; hence, revision petition be allowed and impugned order be set aside and matter may be remanded back to learned State Commission. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondent/complainant submitted that as learned District forum had already discussed all aspects, order passed by learned State Commission is in accordance with law; hence, revision petition be dismissed.

HON ''ble Apex Court in HVPNL Vs. Mahavir, 2001 10 SCC 659 observed as under: "1.In a number of cases coming up in appeal in this Court, we find that the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana at Chandigarh is passing a standard order in the following terms: ''We have heard the Law Officer of HVPN appellant and have also perused the impugned order. We do not find any legal infirmity in the detailed and well -reasoned order passed by District Forum, Kaithal. Accordingly, we uphold the impugned order and dismiss the appeal''.

We may point out that while dealing with a first appeal, this is not the way to dispose of the matter. The appellate forum is bound to refer to the pleadings of the case, the submissions of the counsel, necessary points for consideration, discuss the evidence and dispose of the matter by giving valid reasons. It is very easy to dispose of any appeal in this fashion and the higher courts would not know whether learned State Commission had applied its mind to the case. We hope that such orders will not be passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana at Chandigarh in future. A copy of this order may be communicated to the Commission".

IN the light of above judgment, it becomes clear that Appellate Court while deciding an appeal is required to deal with all the aspects and arguments raised by the appellant and as learned State Commission has not dealt with any facts of the case and arguments of the appellant, it would be appropriate to remand the matter back to the learned State Commission for disposal by speaking order after dealing with all the contentions and arguments raised by the parties.

CONSEQUENTLY , revision petition filed by the petitioner is allowed and order dated 8.8.2014 passed by the State Commission in Appeal No. 720 of 2014 Rajasthan Housing Board and Ors. Vs. Arjun Singh Chaudhary is set aside and matter is remanded back to the learned State Commission for deciding it by speaking order after giving an opportunity of being heard to the parties.

PARTIES are directed to appear before the learned State Commission on 26.05.2015.