IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT : : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD W.P. No.4482 of 2011 Dated:16-08-2011 Between: M/S Power Welfare Society, Rep. by its President and another. ….Petitioners. And Pavuluri Koteswara Rao and another. ….Respondents. The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD W.P.No.4482 of 2011 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice N.V.Ramana) The Writ Petition is filed against the interim Order passed by the A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad in R.P.No.1 of 2011 dated 02.02.2011. The writ petitioners herein are the respondents in the said R.P.No.1 of 2011 before the State Forum. Respondent No.1 herein has preferred the revision against the Order passed by the District Consumer Forum-III, Hyderabad dismissing the application filed by him seeking interim direction against the respondents/writ petitioners for deposit of Rs.16,00,000/- with interest and costs. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The writ petitioners society, a non-profit organization, has been constructing apartments and that the 1st respondent has paid an amount of Rs.16,00,000/- towards sale consideration of the flat. It appears subsequently some disputes have arisen between the parties and the 1st respondent in the writ petition filed I.A.No.224 of 2010 before the District Consumer Forum-III, Hyderabad alleges that the society has not completed work within the time schedule. The writ petitioners-society denied all the allegations. District Forum has dismissed the interim application filed by the 1st respondent in the writ petition, later on he filed the revision. In the revision, State Consumer Forum passed a conditional Order as follows: “The respondents are directed to file an affidavit before the District Forum on or before 21.02.2011 that it would keep one flat unsold, failing which the Society has to give bank guarantee for the said amount. The said direction is given subject to the result of Orders in the main complaint.” Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is preferred by the respondents therein. Learned counsel for the writ petitioners contended that the condition imposed by the State Consumer Forum is onerous condition and which is not the clause mentioned in the agreement and there is no need to pass such an Order. On the other hand, respondents filed a detailed counter supporting the Order of the State Consumer Forum and contended that there is no need to interfere with the Order passed by the State Consumer Forum. During the course of hearing, it was brought to the notice of the Court that already the writ petitioners furnished bank guarantee on 21.02.2011. We have perused the Order of the State Forum. The Order passed by the State Forum is based on equities to protect the interest of the 1st respondent. In view of the undisputed fact that the 1st respondent has paid an amount of Rs.16,00,000/-, to protect the interest of the 1st respondent such Order was passed with valid reasons and there is no need to interfere with the said Order. It is represented that the evidence of the 1st respondent side is over. Under these circumstances, we direct the District Consumer Forum-III, Hyderabad to expedite the hearing of the matter and to dispose of the matter expeditiously, preferably within a period of Four (4) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. The District Consumer Forum-III, Hyderabad is directed to expedite the hearing of the matter and to dispose of the matter expeditiously, preferably within a period of Four (4) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. There shall be no Order as to costs. _______________________ JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA. _____________________________ JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD Dated:16-08-2011 Ksp