This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner, Estate Officer, CIDCO Bhavan against the order dated 15.2.2018 passed by the State Commission, Maharashtra, Mumbai in FA No.A/15/433 whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order dated 21.11.2014 passed by the District Forum in CC No.160/2011 was dismissed for default and for non-prosecution. Notice was issued to the respondent but even after service none is present today, though the vakalatnama has been filed and reply has also been filed in the matter. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as perused the reply filed by the respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that out of six hearings before the State Commission this was the only date when the counsel for the petitioner could not be present and the appeal has been dismissed in default and for non-prosecution. It is true that the State Commission has recorded in the order that counsel for the petitioner was warned even on previous date that if the counsel does not appear on the next date, the matter will be disposed of and accordingly, the dismissal order has been passed. Counsel for the petitioner states that he has merit in the appeal and that is why notice was issued by the State Commission to the respondent. As the appellant has been vigilant to pursue the appeal and it is stated that only on one date the counsel for the petitioner could not appear before the State Commission, in the interest of justice, I deem it appropriate to set aside the order dated 15.2.2018 passed by the State Commission at a cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent/complainant before the State Commission. The State Commission to restore the appeal at its original number and proceed to decide the same on merits after giving opportunity of being heard to both the parties. The State Commission to proceed only after the amount of Rs.10,000/- has been paid to the respondent. Parties to appear before the State Commission on 3.12.2018. | 
