N. MANOHAR REDDY Vs. HAPPY FARM AND RESORTS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVISION petitions No. 3025 -3027 of 2011 arises out of common order dated 23.6.2006, passed in First Appeals No.1311 -1313 of 2006 by State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Karnataka(for short, State Commission) whereas, Revision Petition No.3028 of 2011 arise out of order dated 16.8.2007, passed in First Appeal No.1692 of 2007 by the State Commission. Since, common question of facts and law are involved in these petitions, as such above noted petitions are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) COMPLAINANTS filed consumer complaints against the Petitioner on the allegations that attracted by the Housing Scheme launched by the petitioner, they wanted to purchase plots for which certain amount was paid by way of consideration. However, there was no development of any of the plots, so they requested the Petitioner/O.P. No.2 to refund the amounts paid by them. Since, petitioner fails to refund the amount, complainants filed consumer complaints seeking refund of amounts alongwith interest.

(3.) BEFORE Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum(for short, District Forum), petitioner entered appearance through its counsel and sought time to file its version. Inspite of various opportunities granted to the petitioner, he did not place his version before the District Forum and as such District Forum proceeded in the absence of the version of the petitioner.