Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2022) 06 NCDRC CK 0067

M/s Land Twisters vs Ravi Chandra

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 28 June 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Deepa Sharma, Presiding Member · Subhash Chandra, Member
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
First Appeal No. 154 Of 2019

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 213 words

Complainant is present in person with his Counsel.  Vakalatnama is filed in court and taken on record.

During the course of the arguments, learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Complainant has already executed the Sale Deed with the actual owner Satwinder Singh even before filing of the Complaint.  He has further submitted that the Complainant had filed a false Complaint and intentionally had not impleaded Satwinder Singh as a party to the Complaint.  Learned Counsel for the Appellant has requested that in order to prove the correct facts on record, it is essential that the impugned order, which is ex-parte order, be set aside and the matter be remanded back to the State Commission for fresh trial.

At this stage, the Complainant after going through the record and hearing the submissions, submits that the impugned order may be set aside and his Complaint may be dismissed as withdrawn because he does not want to pursue the Complaint as he has already received the possession of the subject flat after making full payment and nothing is due towards the present Appellant, Land Twisters.

In view of these submissions, the impugned order is set aside and the Complaint No.390 of 2018 stands dismissed as withdrawn.

The Appeal stands disposed of in above terms.