PER JUSTICE J.M. MALIK Counsel for the parties present. Due to inadvertence we did not order the litigation charges. Respondent-Smt. Gaura Devi is present. First of all, petitioner will pay litigation charges in the sum of Rs. 7,500/- through demand draft in her name. Arguments on merits also heard. The impugned order runs as follows:- “06.05.2013 Present: None for the appellant. Respondent in person. FA-809/12 The appeal called out. None for the appellant South Delhi Municipal Corporation despite repeated calls. Appeal dismissed in appellant’s default. FDR, if any deposited, be released forthwith.” On 06.05.2013, respondent/complainant was present before the State Commission. She is also present today. Counsel for the appellant before the State Commission was not present. The record also shows that the appellant/petitioner was proceeded against exparte before the District Forum as well. The only idea is to harass the poor lady. In the interest of justice, we accept the revision petition and restore the case before the State Commission subject to payment of Rs. 7500/- as costs, which will also be paid to Smt. Gaura Devi through demand draft in her name. Both the costs in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- be paid by one demand draft before the State Commission. The State Commission is directed to decide the case as per Law. The State Commission will proceed further in the case, after satisfaction that the demand draft is given to the complainant Smt. Gaura Devi, in its presence; otherwise it can dismiss the case for non-prosecution. Parties are directed to appear before the State Commission on 07.03.2014, at 10-30 A.M. sharp. | 
