02-03-2015 - Both the appeals were taken up together. The appellants are common. The nature of allegations made in the complaint by the complainants / respondents are similar. The directions issued in both the cases are also similar.

2.       Mr. Arbind Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the appellants in both the cases submitted that only from the notice served on the appellants in Execution Cases, they learnt about the impugned orders and therefore there was delay in filing these appeals. He submitted that neither any notices nor any summons were served on the appellants in the complaint cases in question. The impugned orders are exparte. The appellants may be given a chance to contest the cases.

3.       In both complaint cases the allegations in brief was that agreements were entered into between the complainants and the appellants for purchase of flats with other facilities. Certain amounts were paid, but the appellants neither completed nor handed over the flats in question to the complainants. It was further alleged that legal notices were also issued.

4.       It appears from the impugned orders that notices were validly served on the appellants but as they did not choose to appear, the cases were ordered to proceed exparte against them. The Complainants supported their cases by evidences.

5.       The learned District Forum found that the cases of the complainants were proved. Consequently it was found that there was deficiency in service on the part of the appellants, in both the cases. 

6.       The Learned District Forum directed the appellants to complete the flats in question and hand over the same to the complainants of both the cases and get the flats registered also. As there was delay caused by the appellants, they were also directed to pay the difference of registration charges. The advance consideration amounts already paid by the complainants were to be adjusted against the actual area of the flats to be handed over to the complainants at the agreed rates. Such directions were to be complied with by the appellants within 60 days of the orders, failing which the complainants were entitled to recover the advance amounts paid by them along with penal interest @ 18% p.a.  from the date of filing of the complaint cases till the realization, besides Rs. 20,000/- by way of compensation and Rs. 5,000/- as litigation cost .

7.       The appellants have not brought on record anything to show that the notices were not validly served on them. Only a bald and general averment has been made by the appellants that neither any notices nor any summons were served on them at any point of time during the pendency of the complaint cases.

8.       Therefore, it has to be accepted that notices were validly served on the appellants in both the complaint cases but they chose not to appear and contest the cases. Now when the Learned District Forum had to pass exparte orders, the appellants are seeking a chance to contest the cases for which no grounds are made out. Only by seeking one chance, it cannot be given without any basis. It is surprising when the appellants say that they did not receive notices in both the case. In our opinion, such modus operandi of the litigant parties, for dragging the cases, should not be encouraged. Ex-parte order, is as good as contested order.

9.       In the result no grounds are made out either to condone the long delay of about 10 months in filing both the appeals nor any grounds are made out for interference with the impugned orders. Accordingly these appeals are dismissed.

                       Issue free copy of this order to all concerned for information and needful.

          Ranchi,

          Dated:-02/03/2015