JUDGMENT

JUSTICE V.K.JAIN (ORAL)

          This revision petition is directed against the order of the State Commission dated 12.12.2017, whereby the said Commission allowed an application filed by the appellant for producing additional documentary evidence and remanded the matter back to the District Forum for deciding the complaint afresh after considering the said additional documents.

2.      The documents which the State Commission took on record were intended  to prove that the respondent had already entered into an agreement on 10.01.2008 with one Mr. Anil Dange for sale of the flat, subject matter of the consumer complaint and had also handed over the possession of the said flat to him.  The complainant, who is present in the Court, admits that the flat in question is no more in possession of the respondent and has already been delivered to Mr. Anil Dange.

3.      Therefore, in view of the said admission, the additional documents allowed by the State Commission are no more required. The impugned order is, therefore, set aside and the matter is remitted back to the State Commission to decide the appeal filed by the respondent against the order of the District Forum dated 28.01.2014 on its merit.  The parties are directed to appear before the State Commission on 25.04.2019.  The State Commission shall decide the appeal preferred by the appellant on its time within three months of the parties appearing before it.