Delay of 33 days in filing the Revision Petition is condoned. Petitioner was the opposite party before the District Forum. Respondent/complainant purchased a plot allotted by the petitioner from the original allottee, Sudarshan Kumar, through his GPA, Smt.Prem Lata, for a consideration of Rs.6,50,000/-. Original allottee obtained necessary permission from the petitioner to transfer the plot in favour of the complainant and the same was granted vide Memo No.1979 dated 10.2.2005. The GPA executed the sale deed in favour of the respondent on 8.10.1997. Subsequently, the original allottee changed his mind and, in connivance with the GPA, filed a civil suit along with GPA at Karnal restraining the petitioner to transfer the plot in question in favour of the complainant. Said prayer was rejected by the civil court. Thereafter, the respondent approached the petitioner for transfer of plot in his favour but the petitioner did not do so. Aggrieved by this, respondent filed a complaint before the District Forum. District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the petitioner to transfer the plot in favour of the respondent. Aggrieved by this, petitioner filed an appeal before the State Commission, which has been dismissed by the impugned order. We agree with the view taken by the State Commission that the original allottee, after having obtained the permission from the petitioner to transfer the plot, executed the sale deed in favour of the respondent on 8.10.1997 through General Power of Attorney. The GPA was cancelled by the original allottee on 1.3.2005. Cancellation of the GPA would not affect the rights of the respondent in whose favour the sale deed had been executed 8 years prior to the cancellation of the GPA. We do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the State Commission. Dismissed.
......................JASHOK BHANPRESIDENT
......................B.K. TAIMNIMEMBER | | 
