Madhya Pradesh

StateCommission

RP/22/19

M/S RSR HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

MUKESH SAHU - Opp.Party(s)

SH.YADVENDRA YADVA

05 Apr 2022

ORDER

M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PLOT NO. 76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL (M.P.)

 

RP No. 19 / 2022.

 

 

 

M/s R. S. R. Housing & Construction

Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal & Anr.                                                                   …. APPLICANTS.

 

 

                        Versus

 

Mukesh Sahu & Ors.                                                                       …. RESPONDENTS.

 

 

 

As per Shri Justice Shantanu Kemkar, (oral) :

 

 

Date of                                          O R D E R                                                   

Order                                                                                                                 

 

05.04.2022                Shri Yadvendra Yadav. learned counsel for the applicants.

                                    Shri Deepesh Joshi, learned counsel appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

                                    With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties the matter is finally heard.

                                    This revision has been filed at the instance of the opposite parties challenging the order dated 18.11.2021 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bench No.2 Bhopal (for short the “District Commission”) in CC No.331/2020.

 

 

• 2 -

 

 

                        2.         The grievance of the applicants is to the effect that the impugned order has been passed without due application of mind and in pre-judged manner.  On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents / complainants has argued that the order is a reasoned order and there is no illegality or infirmity warranting interference in revisional jurisdiction.

 

                        3.         After arguing at length learned counsel for the parties submit that the applicants’ grievance essentially is to the effect that they have not even properly heard on their application filed under Section 38 (9) (d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 read with Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act.  In the circumstances, learned counsel for the parties submit that instead of dealing with this revision on merits, they have no objection if the matter is sent back to the District Commission for passing fresh order on the said application after giving due opportunity of hearing to the parties.

 

                        4.         Having regard to the aforesaid prayer as agreed by learned counsel for the parties, the impugned order is set-aside.  The matter is remitted to the District Commission for deciding the said application afresh in accordance with law without being influenced by its earlier order or the order passed by this Commission today.

 

                        5.         With the aforesaid direction, the revision is disposed of.

 

 

• 3 -

 

                        6.         The parties are directed to appear before the District Commission on 6.4.2022.

                        7.         CC today to the parties.

                        8.         A copy of this order be also sent to the District Commission today.     

 

 

                          (Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar)                    (S. S. Bansal)      

                   ^{PRESIDENT                                                                             MEMBER}   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Phadke