Per Mr N Arumugam, Hon’ble Member

These are the appeals filed by the appellant against order dtd.08.04.2011 passed by Addl. District Forum, Nagpur in CC No.182, 183 & 184 of 2010. Since the appellants in all three cases are same and the nature of these cases is also same, we are passing a common order.

The facts of the case in brief are as under:-

1.      The appellant made an agreement with the respondent in selling the plot for construction of house in P.H.No.26, Survey Nos.30 & 31, Muradpur Village, Tah. Umrer, Dist. Nagpur. While making an agreement, respondents paid part of the amount as consideration and the balance will be payable in instalments.

2.      In the meanwhile, the appellant collected some instalments from respondents but he could not take steps for converting the agriculture land into non-agriculture and getting the sanction from the competent authority as necessary for layout.

3.      The respondents came to know that there was a dispute in the above survey numbers. The appellant also asked further instalments without taking necessary steps for getting the land converted into non-agriculture.  Hence, they filed consumer complaints u/s 12 of CPA 1986 before the Addl. District Forum, Nagpur.

4.      After giving proper notices / information to both the parties the appellant did not present before the Addl. District Forum and purposely avoided to present before the Addl. District Forum, Nagpur. Hence, the complainants were heard and passed ex-parte order. Against this order the appellant preferred these present appeals.

5.      Adv.Mrs. Paunikar for the appellant. None for the respondents.

6.      On perusal of the case papers, order of the Forum it appears that the appellant / o.p. has not taken any steps to execute the sale-deed of the plots of the respective respondents.

7.      Advocate for the appellant argues that there was some compromise agreement between the present respondents and the appellant and that was why she could not present before the Addl. District Forum, Nagpur. While perusing so called compromise agreement it appears that respondents never signed the said compromise deed and moreover, the compromise deed was prepared on 11^th Feb. 2011 and the case was decided on 08^th April 2011.  In these two months period the appellant did not bother to submit the compromise deed before the Addl. District Forum, which clearly shows that the appellant has not taken sufficient steps to redress the grievance of the respondents. Hence, this Commission is passing the following order:-

ORDER

1.      All these three appeals are dismissed.

2.      No orders as to cost.

3.      Inform the parties accordingly.

          Pronounced on 15.07.2011