Being aggrieved of the order of the State Commission dated 29.08.2012 the petitioner has filed this revision petition. Along with -2- the revision petition an application for condonation of delay of 18 days in filing of the revision petition has been moved. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has tried to explain the delay of 18 days by contending that vide the impugned order State Commission closed the right of the petitioner-OP to file reply to the complaint and on the prayer of the petitioner-OP referred the parties to Mediation Centre for amicably settlement of the dispute. Since the petitioner was hopeful that matter would be settled in mediation, he failed to take appropriate steps for filing the revision petition and on failure of the mediation proceedings he contacted his counsel to file the revision petition. It is further submitted that at that time wife of the counsel for the petitioner was admitted in Max Hospital consequently, he could not prepare the revision petition in time. The reason given for late filing of revision petition appears to be satisfactory therefore we condone the delay in filing of the revision petition. 3. Before adverting to the submissions of the parties, it would be useful to have a look on the impugned order, which reads thus: -3- resent: None for the Complainant Shri Rajat Bhardwaj, Counsel for the OP The case was slated for filing written version and objection against interim application earlier on 29.2.2012 then on 9.5.2012, again on 29.8.2012, but the OP has not filed the same till date. Counsel for the OP submission is that the OP has instructed him to make a proposal for mediation. Since the Written Version has not been filed in spite of giving various opportunities, opportunity for filing the written version stands closed. On prayer of Counsel for the OP the matter is referred to the Mediation Centre with the direction that in case the Mediation does not take place within a month the file be sent back to the Commission. The complainant be informed through his Counsel for Mediation immediately; and through his clerk which is present during the proceedings here. If Mediation fails, put up on 26.09.2012 for filing ex-parte evidence by the Complainant. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that impugned order is not sustainable for the reason that the State Commission has failed to appreciate that the petitioner failed to file his written statement to the complaint because the petitioner intended to amicable settled the matter and wanted it to be referred for mediation. It is further submitted that if the impugned order is not set aside it would cause grave injustice to the petitioner who has a very strong case on merits. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that perusal of the impugned order would show that the petitioner was negligent -4- in prosecuting his case and despite of number of opportunities he failed to file his written statement. Thus it is contended that the impugned order cannot be faulted. Learned counsel for the respondent however has submitted that though there is no reason to interfere with the impugned order in revisional jurisdiction the respondent, in the interest of justice, has no objection if the revision petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside and the petitioner is given one more chance to file his written statement subject to cost to compensate the respondent for unnecessary delay caused in disposal of his complaint. 6. In view the concessions given at the Bar and facts and circumstances of the case, we allow the revision petition and set aside the impugned order closing the defence of the petitioner subject to cost of Rs.20,000/- to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent by way of demand draft in his name on or before 05.03.2013 as also that the petitioner shall file his written statement, if any, in the State Commission on or before 05.03.2013 and no more adjournment in this regard shall be given. Since this matter has already been -5- delayed substantially the State Commission is requested to dispose of the matter within 9 months. Parties to appear before the State Commission on 05.03.2013.