This appeal has been filed by the appellant against order dated 31.07.2015 passed by learned State Commission in Complaint No. 04 of 2015 – Shibani Motors Vs. G.M., Hero Motors Corpn. Ltd. & Ors., by which complaint was dismissed in default.

2.      Brief facts of the case are that complainant/appellant filed complaint against opposite parties /respondents and as none appeared for the complainant, complaint was dismissed in default by impugned order, against which this appeal has been filed along with application for condonation of delay.

3.      Notice sent to Respondent No. 4 not received back though he was served before admission and perusal of impugned order reveals that he was not present before State Commission on previous two occasions, hence his presence is not required.

4.      Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused record.

5.      Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that complainant being a lady could not file appeal in time and counsel for the complainant did not appear before State Commission so appeal was dismissed in default, hence delay be condoned and impugned order be set aside and complaint be restored.  On the other hand, learned counsel for Respondents No. 1 to 3 submitted that on previous two occasions also none appeared for the complainant and no reason for condonation of delay has been given in the application and no reasons for non-appearance has been given in memo of appeal, hence appeal be dismissed.

6.      As per office report there is delay of 69 days in filing appeal and the ground for condonation of delay mentioned in the application is that appellant being proprietor of the firm was in paucity of funds and could not contact counsel in time, so delay occurred.  Prima-facie this is no ground for condonation of delay but complainant’s proprietor being a lady, I deem it appropriate to condonation delay of 69 days as complaint was dismissed in default, on payment of cost.  Consequently, application for condonation of delay is allowed, subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- to Respondents No. 1 to 3 and delay stands condoned.

7.      Impugned order reveals that counsel for the complainant did not appear on the date of dismissal as well on previous two occasions and in memo of appeal only this fact has been mentioned that for the reasons best known to the counsel, he did not appear.  Meaning thereby no reason for absence of complainant as well as counsel has been given.  But as complaint has been dismissed in default, I deem it appropriate to allow appeal and set aside impugned order, subject to cost so that the complaint may be decided on merits.

8.      Consequently, appeal filed by the appellant is allowed and impugned order dated 31-07-2015 passed by learned State Commission in Complaint No. 04 of 2015 – Shibani Motors Vs. G.M., Hero Motors Corpn. Ltd. & Ors., is set aside subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- by appellant to Respondents No. 1 to 3 and matter is remanded back to learned State Commission to decide complaint in accordance with law, subject to payment of cost for condonation of delay, on or before the date for appearance before State Commission.

9.      Parties are directed to appear before State Commission on 16.01.2017 and  State Commission will issue notice to  opposite party no. 4 and proceed further.