NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/3919/2014

RAM LAL JAIN (DECEASED) & 3 ORS. - Complainant(s)

Versus

RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD & 2 ORS. - Opp.Party(s)

MR. DEVENDRA MOHAN MATHUR

08 Dec 2014

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
REVISION PETITION NO. 3919 OF 2014
 
(Against the Order dated 31/07/2014 in Appeal No. 1521/2008 of the State Commission Rajasthan)
1. RAM LAL JAIN (DECEASED) & 3 ORS.
THROUGH :HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: 1: PAWAN KUMAR JAIN, S/O LATE SHRI RAM LAL JAIN, R/O VILLAGE MAANPURA, TEHSIL MANDALGARH,
DISTRICT: BHEELWARA
RAJASTHAN
2. 2. SANJAY KUMAR JAIN, S/O LATE SHRI RAM LAL JAIN
R/O VILLAGE MAANPURA, TEHSIL MANDALGARH,
DISTRICT: BHEELWARA
RAJASTHAN
3. 3. VIKAS JAIN, S/O LATE SHRI RAM LAL JAIN,
R/O VILLAGE MAANPURA, TEHSIL MANDALGARH,
DISTRICT: BHEELWARA
RAJASTHAN
4. 4. MUKESH KUMAR JAIN,
R/O VILLAGE MAANPURA, TEHSIL MANDALGARH,
DISTRICT: BHEELWARA
RAJASTHAN
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD & 2 ORS.
THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, JYOTI NAGAR,
JAIPUR
RAJASTHAN
2. RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD,
THROUGH ITS RESIDENT ENGINEER,
BHEELWARA
RAJASTHAN
3. RAJASTHAN HOSUING BOARD,
THROUGH ITS ASSISTANT ESTATE MANAGER,
DISTRICT: BHEELWARA
RAJASTHAN
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN, PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. DR. B.C. GUPTA, MEMBER

For the Petitioner :
Mr. Devendra Mohan Mathur, Advocate
For the Respondent :
Mr. Ankit Acharya, Advocate

Dated : 08 Dec 2014
ORDER

This revision petition is directed against the order passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on           31-07-2014 in Appeal No.1521 of 2008. The grievance of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the State Commission has passed a virtually non-speaking order without taking note of or dealing with the grounds taken in the appeal and the contentions advanced by the parties during the course of hearing. On a perusal of the impugned order we find that it does not even refer to the grounds taken in the appeal for the contentions urged by the parties during the course of hearing. The order passed by the State Commission is for all practical purposes a non-speaking order. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order dated 31-07-2014 passed by the State Commission and remit the matter back to the State Commission for passing a speaking order after duly considering the contentions advanced by the parties during the course of hearing. Needless to say, the State Commission shall not only refer to those submissions but also give its view/finding on them while passing a fresh order in terms of this direction. The parties are directed to appear before the State Commission on 14-01-2015. We also request the State Commission to decide the appeal within three months of the parties appearing before it.

 
......................J
V.K. JAIN
PRESIDING MEMBER
......................
DR. B.C. GUPTA
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.