Today is fixed for passing order in respect of the petition filed by the op no. 1 for setting aside ex parte order.

Ld. Advocate for the complainant side and ld. Advocate for the ops are found ready.

Heard both sides. Considered submission.

At the time of hearing ld. Advocate for the ops pointed out that due to lockdown period and subsequent effect of the lockdown the op failed to take steps and over this issue ld. Advocate of the ops referred the case of Hitendra Pathak and others vs. Achyut Kashinath Karekar and another (supra) and also referred the case of Hilli Multipurpose.

Ld. Advocate for the complainant raised objection in this regard and has drawn the attention of this Court to the written objection which has been filed by the complainant side.

After going through the materials of this case record and also after considering the submission highlighted by the ld. Lawyers of both sides and also after respectful read of the views given by the Apex Court in the above noted two cases ld. Commission is of the opinion that the op no. 1 is a necessary party in this case and in the absence of the op no. 1 there is no scope for proper and completed dismissal of this case.

Considering these two factors the prayer for setting aside the ex parte hearing order is allowed on contest but at the cost of Rs. 500/- payable to the complainant side on the next date positively.

Fix 2.8.2022 for filing evidence on affidavit by the complainant in the C.C. case no. 2 of 2021.

In the light of the observation made above the M.A. application no. 2 of 2021 is disposed of on contest.