We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

          The main reason which prompted the petitioner to file the present revision petition is that the order passed by the fora below might not constitute a precedent, because on one hand, fora below found that the complainant was not a ‘consumer’ within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and no plot of land was allotted to him; on the other hand, it has allowed the complaint and directed the petitioner to refund the deposited amount to the complainant with interest @9% p.a.

Having considered the matter, going by the small amount involved and the status of the complainant, we would not like to interfere with the order passed by fora below but it will not constitute a precedent.

The revision petition is dismissed.