Anupam Dasgupta, Presiding Member—These revision petitions are directed against the order dated 25.03.2011 of the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai (in short, ‘the State Commission’) in First Appeals no. A/ 09/940, A/ 09/941, A/09/942 and A/09/939. The State Commission dismissed each of these appeals though the Additional Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Thane (in short, ‘the District Forum’) had, by its common order dated 21.05.2009, partially allowed the complaints. As the facts underlying each revision petition/appeal/complaint are more or less identical except the names of the petitioner/complainant, these revision petitions are being dealt with by this common order.

2. Petitioners were the complainants before the District Forum. They alleged deficiency in service on the part of the respondents, in that the respondents had failed to execute the agreement for sale even after the complainants had made full payment of the consideration for the flats and received the possession thereof from the respondents. The respondents/opposite parties (OPs) resisted the complaint mainly on the ground that the cost of construction had risen steeply leading