Mr. Nalin Majithia, Advocate present on behalf of the appellant-M/s. N. Kumar Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. and Mr. Pankaj Kapoor, Advocate present on behalf of Punam Pride Condominium.
Vakalatnama has been filed today on behalf of the respondent No.1-Punam Pride Condominium. Notice sent to respondent No.2-M/s. Link House Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. has come back with postal remark “left”. It is verified that the notice had gone on the same address as in the original complaint and before the State Commission. Therefore, service of notice on respondent No.2 is taken as completed.
It is seen from the order of the State Commission both OPs, OP-1-M/s. Link House Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. and OP-2-M/s. N. Kumar Construction Company Pvt., Ltd. were unrepresented. The State Commission has made the following observations in para 12:-
“12. The Commission issued notice of this complaint on 22/10/2008 to the opponents. The said notice issued to the opponent Nos.2 & 3 was returned back with endorsement as “Incomplete Address”. Therefore, on 27/02/2009 the complainants furnished new address of opponents No.2 & 3 and the service report of opponent No.1 was awaited. On 06/04/2009 notice of opponent No.1 was returned back with remark as “Left” and opponent Nos.2 & 3 was returned back with endorsement as “Refused”. The complainants then filed service affidavit on 02/02/2010 still none of the opponents appeared, therefore, the complaint was proceeded exparte on 15/12/2011.”
Shri Pankaj Kapoor, Advocate for the respondent No.1 makes a statement that he has no objection, if the matter is remanded to the State Commission, with the direction to permit the OPs fresh opportunity to file their written reply and to decide the matter afresh. He however, prays that the State Commission may be advised to dispose it of within a limited time framed.
In view of the above, by the consent of the two parties impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the State Commission for fresh consideration and decision preferably, within a period of three months from the date of this order. The parties are directed to be present on 09.05.2013 before the State Commission. Appeal stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Further on 29.11.2012, this Commission had stayed the operation of the impugned order of the State Commission, subject to deposit of Rs.4 lakhs within a period of four weeks. Counsel for the appellant informs that the deposit was made on 26.12.2012. In view of the decision to remand the matter to the State Commission, learned counsel seeks permission to withdraw the said deposit. He is permitted to make an application before the State Commission.
| 
