By SRI.K. VIJAYAKUMARAN, PRESIDENT.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> This is an application seeking restoration of the complaint dismissed after condonation of the delay of more than 400 days.<br /> <br /> <br /> The averments in the petition are that the complaint was filed by the complainant on 24.5.2006 that she did not engage any Advocate, that she was under the impression that she need appear before Forum on receipt of notice, and so she did not appear, that on 30.10.2006 the complaint was dismissed for default which came to her notice only on 2.1.2008 when the opp.parties initiated action against her and that there is no willful negligence on her part.<br /> The application is opposed by the respondents.<br /> <br /> <br /> Heard both sides. The case of the complainant is that after filing the complaint she was under the impression that she need appear only after receipt of notice and so did not appear. It cannot be believed that the complainant who filed the complaint herself is not aware of the procedure. After appearance of the opp.parties and filing version the case was adjourned thrice for a affidavit and evidence. But the complainant did not turn up or file affidavit or adduced evidence and thereupon the complaint was dismissed. The definite case of the opp.parties/Respondent is that this petition is now filed with a view of delay the proceedings initiated by the opp.parties. As a matter of fact there is no satisfactory explanation whatsoever for the delay. It is well settled that for condonation of delay sufficient cause must be shown and delay is to be explained satisfactorily. Every prudent person would enquire about the fate of the case especially when no notice is received for about 1 ½ years. The reason stated for condonation of delay in our view is not a sufficient cause. It is obvious that the complaint was all along aware of the dismissal of the case and the present application as argued by the opp.parties is only to delay the proceedings initiated by the opp.parties. In our view the complainant has not shown sufficient cause for the delay and therefore we are not inclined to condone the delay.<br /> <br /> <br /> In the result this application is dismissed. No costs.<br /> <br /> Dated this the 24th day of October, 2008<br /> <br />