Despite service of notice on the Respondents by dasti process, nobody has put in appearance on their behalf.  Affidavit of service on the Respondents has also been filed the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner.

As per the statement made by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, travel expenses, as directed by the order dated 08.08.2018, have been paid to the Respondents No. 1 & 2/Complainants.

Under the circumstances, service on the Respondents is treated as sufficient.

By the impugned order dated 27.04.2018, Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Ahmedabad (for short “the State Commission”) has dismissed the Appeal, preferred by Parle Biscuits Pvt. Ltd., the Petitioner herein, on the ground that when the case was called out, none remained present on their behalf.

Heard the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner.

Sufficient reasons have been given as to why the Petitioner’s Counsel could not appear before the State Commission on the date fixed.     

We, therefore, allow the Revision Petition; set aside the impugned order passed by the State Commission; and restore Appeal No. 1162 of 2013 on the board of the State Commission. 

We request the State Commission to decide the Appeal expeditiously in accordance with law, preferably within six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment in the case and shall appear on the date so fixed by the State Commission.