1. Repeatedly called out. No one appears. 2. We have perused the record. These petitions (02 nos.) have been filed under Section 21(b) of the Act 1986 in challenge to the Order dated 25.07.2017 of the State Commission in appeals no. 17/417 and no. 17/421 arising out of the Order dated 07.04.2017 of the District Commission in complaint no. 606 of 2014. The matter relates to a builder - buyer dispute. The District Commission appraised the case and vide its Order dated 07.04.2017 partially allowed the complaint with the following award: 12. Therefore, we partially accept the plea of the complainant on the basis of complete study and consideration of case facts and order that within 30 days of the issue of the order: a. The complainant shall pay the balance amount of INR 12,24,950/- (Rupees Twelve Lacs Twenty Four Thousand Nine Hundred and Fifty) for the House under question to the respondents. b. The respondent shall pay an interest @9% per annum to the complainant on Rs. 31,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty One Lacs) from 01.04.2013 till the date of possession of the house. c. The OP shall pay INR 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) to the Complainant as compensation for Mental agony caused on account of the aforesaid acts. d. The respondent shall pay Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand) as the cost of legal expenses and advocate’s fee to the complainant. Both the complainant (the respondent herein) as well as the opposite party builder (the petitioner herein) filed appeals before the State Commission. The State Commission made its appreciation of the case and dismissed both appeals “for being baseless”. The builder has then preferred these petitions before this Commission. 4. We notice that the State Commission has analyzed the case in considerable depth and has passed a well-reasoned Order. It has concurred with the findings of the District Commission. On the face of it we notice no patent perversity in the appreciation of the facts and evidence, or a legal principal ignored or wrongly ruled, or miscarriage of justice having been occasioned, and we discern no good ground readily available to justify interference in the exercise of the revisional jurisdiction of this Commission. As such we have no hesitation in dismissing the petitions in default in the absence of the petitioner today. 5. The instant petitions no. 2568-2569 of 2017 stand dismissed in default for lack of prosecution. 6. The Registry is requested to send a copy each of this Order to the parties in the petitions and to their learned counsel within three days. The stenographer is requested to upload this Order on the website of this Commission immediately. | 
