Complainant/respondent filed a complaint before the State Commission against the petitioner (opposite party builder) alleging deficiency in service as according to him, despite depositing the full amount of consideration, petitioner failed to develop the plot or hand over possession of the flats.  Respondent moved an application seeking interim relief of refund of deposited amount of Rs.61,31,211/.  The State Commission by the impugned order allowed the said application and directed the petitioner to refund the deposited amount of Rs.61,31,211/- to the complainant.  It was observed that the question regarding interest, costs and damages shall be decided at the time of final disposal of the case.

          Petitioner being aggrieved has filed the present revision petition.

Notice was issued to the respondents.  Operation of the impugned order was stayed.

On 22.08.2011 a settlement had been arrived at between the parties.  Under the settlement petitioner had agreed to hand over possession of the flat as per agreement.  Petitioner also agreed to pay Rs.5/- per square feet of the super area for each month of delay in making the offer of possession of the flat.

Since the revision petition was directed against the interim order, relevant facts were not before us, we directed counsel for the petitioner to file a brief synopsis of facts so that settlement arrived at between the parties could be recorded.  Counsel for the petitioner has field the synopsis. 

Today counsel for the respondent on taking instructions from the respondent who is present in person states that the settlement offered by the petitioner is not acceptable to him; prays that the impugned order be set aside and the case remitted back to the State Commission to decide it afresh in accordance with law.

State Commission has passed the interim order in the nature of a final decree before judgment.  The order under challenge cannot be sustained.  Revision petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside.  Case is remitted back to the State Commission. 

State Commission shall dispose of the complaint in accordance in law after affording due opportunity to the petitioner to file Written Statement and to the parties to lead their evidence.

Parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the State Commission on the date already fixed before it.

Statement made by counsel for the appellant and noted in the order dated 22.08.2012, and the synopsis furnished by the appellant be not taken as admission of any fact by the appellant.  Statement made before us on 22.08.2012 and the facts stated in the synopsis were for the purpose of recording a compromise only.