Revision Petition No.698/2011 has been filed by Rajasthan Housing Board, which was the opposite party before the District Forum, with a delay of 54 days and Revision Petition No.906/2011 has been filed by the complainant with a delay of 70 days.  Delay in filing the Revision Petitions is condoned.

Opposite party as well as the complainant have filed the cross-revisions against the same impugned order. 

Counsel for the parties contend that the order passed by the State Commission is a non-speaking order.  That the State Commission, being the final court of fact, was obliged to record reasons in support of the conclusions arrived at. 

Limited Notice be issued to the respondents to show cause as to why the impugned order be not set aside and the case remitted back to the State Commission to decide it afresh in accordance with law. 

Mr.Mahendra Singh Yadav, Advocate accepts Notice on behalf of the respondent in R.P. No.698/2011 and Mr.Mukul Kumar, Advocate accepts Notice on behalf of the respondents in R.P. No.906/2011.  Service is complete.

With the consent of the counsel for the parties, both the Revision Petitions are taken up for final disposal at this stage.

Apart from the contention raised by the counsel for the parties that the order passed by the State Commission is a non-speaking order, on perusal of the impugned order, we find that the State Commission has not even recorded the contentions raised by the counsel for the parties.  State Commission is the final court of fact.  It has to decide the questions of fact as well as law.  State Commission has not recorded its independent findings in support of the conclusions arrived at and disposed of the appeals filed by the complainant and the opposite party even without recording the contentions raised by the counsel for the parties by simply observing thus :

“After hearing the counsel for the parties, we have carefully gone through the material on record.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no illegality or error in the directions issued by the District Forum, Kota so as to call for any further interference.  The appeals are dismissed accordingly as having no merits.  No order as to costs.”

The order passed by the State Commission is unsustainable and is accordingly set aside.

Counsel for the parties are agreed that the impugned order be set aside and the case remitted back to the State Commission to decide it afresh in accordance with law after affording due opportunity of hearing to the parties.  Ordered accordingly.  State Commission is directed to record its reasons in support of the conclusions arrived at.

Parties, through their counsel, are directed to appear before the State Commission on 4.5.2011.