AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
RESPONDENTS are present through their Advocate in response to notice before admission issued by us on 14.11.2003 when this appeal was moved before us for amdission/hearing on behalf of the appellant. As the dispute being the subject matter of these proceedings is pending since 1995 and as many as 35 consumers are involved therein, we proceed to dispose of this appeal at the stage of its admission itself on perusal of the material available before us and on hearing the learned Advocates for the parties.
AS is the case, this is a second inning that this amtter is having before us. Earlier some of the complainants filed appeal being No. 1561/2002, which we proceed to dispose of by our order dated 4.6.2003 allowing the appeal which was filed by some of the complainants and remitting the matter to the District Forum for consideration afresh on merits. District Forum had proceeded to reject the claims of the said complainants, who were the appellants in the appeal paper book. After remand, it is noticed that the District Forum has allowed the claims of the complainants vide its order dated 15.10.2003 allowing the claims of all the complainants/respondents herein.
It is the said order, which is challenged in the appeal by the original O.P.
FACTUAL aspects and dispute being the subject matter of the dispute herein dates back in the year 1995. O.Ps. who are appellants herein, (hereinafter refered to as O.Ps. in the judgment) agreed to sell plots of land to the respective complainants for the consideration as agreed. O.Ps. executed the separate agreements, with individual purchasers/complainants herein.
IT is to be stated that in case of some of the complainants/purchasers, O.P. has provided in their Agreement that it will be the responsibility of the O.P. to have the plots of land converted into non-agricultural use. However, since the same was not done for all these years that present complainants approached the District Forum in the dispute herein. District Forum on being satisfied of the fact that transaction with the respective complainants were put through by the O.P. for sell of plots of land, as also receipt of consideration therefor has made the award ordering the O.P. to have the plots converted into non-agricultural use. Across, the learned Advocate for the O.P. appellant submitted that O.P. has already moved into the matter before the appropriate Revenue authority and same is being pursued at that level. He, therefore, prays that reasonable time which is stated to be about a year be granted for the same. As we find that there is no merit in this appeal, only the question is how much time that could be granted to the appellant/O.P. for complying with the said formality.
AT this stage, we have been informed that the concerned officials of the department will be busy for at least 2 months and more, on the ensuing election duty and, therefore, reasonable time be granted. We are of the view that 6 months'' time from today will be fair and reasonable in the facts and situation clarifying that O.P. shall take the necessary steps to ensure that the formality of conversion of non-agricultural use of the respective plots of the complainant is obtained. Hence the following order : ORDER 1. Appeal stands dismissed. 2. No order as to costs. 3. Office shall furnish copies of the order herein to the parties. 4. On request and as a matter of indulgence, we are providing 6 months'' time from today i.e., upto 30.9.2004. 5. It is clarified that till then as far as operative Clause No. 1 is concerned stay shall be operative.
Appeal dismissed.