04-05-2016- Heard the parties.

2. On the prayer for condoning the delay in filing this appeal, it was submitted that a free copy of the impugned order dated 22.02.2014 was not provided to the Complainant – Appellant. He had no knowledge of dismissal of his complaint. When he contacted the office of the District Forum on 07.12.2015, he knew about it and then he applied for certified copy and when it was received by him this appeal was filed on 28.12.2015. It was also summited that since he was not in a position to pay fees to the advocate, he could not get the service of a lawyer.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the Respondents opposed the prayer and submitted that the Appellant should have been vigilant.

4. In the fact and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, the delay in filing this appeal is condoned.

5. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 22.02.2014 dismissing the CC No. 196 of 2012 filed by the Complainant – Appellant for default.

6. According to the Complainant – Appellant, he was informed that the quorum of District Forum was not complete. As he was not in a position to pay fees, he could not avail the service of a lawyer. On 07.12.2015, he learnt about the said order dismissing his complaint for default and then after obtaining the certified copy, he filed the present appeal. It was further submitted that on merits the Appellant has a good case and the cause of action is continuing and, therefore, he may be given a chance to contest his case.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the Respondents opposed the prayer and submitted that from the impugned order it would appear that the Complainant was absent continuously since 16.04.2013 and did not comply the order of District Forum and, therefore, the complaint was rightly dismissed for default.

8. It appears from the impugned order dated 22.02.2014 that the Complainant was absent. O.P. -1 was present. The case was proceeding ex-parte against O.P. -2. It was fixed for filing evidence on oath on behalf of the Appellant. For this purpose he was given last chance on the last date but the same was not filed. As per the record the Complainant was continuously absent from 16.04.2013. Accordingly, the complaint was dismissed for default for not filing evidence on oath.
9. It is true that the Complainant – Appellant should have been more vigilant in pursuing his case but in the interest of justice we are inclined to give a chance to the Complainant – Appellant.

10. On this, learned counsel appearing for O.P. -1/R -1 and O.P. -2/   R -2, submitted that O.P. -2/R -2 may also be given a chance, against whom the case was proceeding ex-parte.

In our opinion, O.P. -2/R -2 may also be given a chance to contest the case.

11. In the circumstances, the impugned order is set aside. CC No. 196 of 2012 is restored to its original file. The parties are directed to appear before the District Forum at 11:00 am on 23 May, 2016 on which date the District Forum will proceed in accordance with law. The parties are directed to cooperate in early disposal of the case, failing which the learned District Forum may proceed ex-parte.

With these observations and directions, this appeal stands disposed off.

Issue free copy of this order to all concerned for information and needful.

Ranchi,

Dated:-  04-05-2016