Respondents/complainants filed a complaint before the District Forum against the petitioner.  Respondents No.2-31 are the flat owners whereas the petitioner is a builder.  District Forum allowed the complaints and directed the petitioner to execute the transfer deed of the property in favour of the complainant No.1, i.e., the housing society.  Petitioner was directed to pay Rs.15,000/- to all the complainants collectively towards costs.

        Petitioner opposite parties filed separate appeals before the State Commission along with an application for stay.  State Commission, by the impugned order dismissed the stay application by observing:

“…………….We find that the conveyance subject to the condition which the appellants are under obligation to execute.  Only question remains that the conveyance which appellant desires to execute and which they were willing to execute after incorporating some additional conditions, supra, can be included or not.  Further since the appeal is pending, this question can be considered in the appeal.  Meanwhile, regular conveyance can be executed reserving rights to incorporate the additional conditions subject to decision of the appeal and therefore, we are not in favour of granting any interim relief in the matter.”

        Mr.S.B.Prabhavalkar, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the caveator respondents No.1-31.  Counsel for the respondents states that the respondents shall not execute the decree passed by the District Forum till the decision of the appeal by the State Commission. 

        In view of the statement made by the counsel for the respondent, this revision petition has become infructuous and is disposed of as such.

        Counsel for the petitioner undertakes not to either start a fresh construction or create third-party rights in the suit property. 

        Since the dispute between the parties is very old, we sould request the State Commission to dispose of the appeal expeditiously.