MA/148/2019 and IA/7008/2019 have been filed by the Petitioner seeking recall of order dated 5.3.2019 and condonation of delay in filing MA/148/2019 respectively. Vide order dated 5.3.2019, the Revision Petition was dismissed for want of prosecution. IA/7008/2019 Heard learned Counsel for the Parties and perused the averments made in the Application seeking condonation of delay. Cause shown is sufficient. The application is allowed and MA/148/2019 is treated to have been filed within limitation. MA/148/2019 Heard learned Counsel for the Parties and perused the averments made in the Application seeking recall of the order dated 5.3.2019. Cause shown is sufficient for non-appearance on 5.3.2019. Order dated 5.3.2019 is recalled and the Revision Petition is restored to its original number. REVISION PETITION Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the order dated 14.11.2018 passed by the West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as “the State Commission”), whereby the Appeal preferred by the Petitioner herein has been dismissed for non-prosecution. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that on account of some misunderstanding and lack of communication, nobody appeared on his behalf before the State Commission on the date fixed and if an opportunity is granted, the Petitioner shall appear before the State Commission and shall not seek any adjournment in the matter. Learned Counsel for the Respondent, however, submitted that the Complaint itself was not maintainable and he invited our attention to the prayer made in the Complaint, which was only restricted to a direction to the Opposite Party not to seize the vehicle but to come for amicable settlement between the parties after reschedulement of the dates and go for legal action through the SRFAESI Act, 2002 and or RDDB Act, 1993 in Debts Recovery Tribunal (D.R.T.), Kolkata which is the proper legal recourse for the Opposite Party. We are not going into the merits of the matter as the order impugned before us is an order passed by the State Commission, which has dismissed the Appeal for want of prosecution. In the interests of justice, we deem it appropriate to give an opportunity to the Petitioner to present his case before the State Commission and the State Commission will be at liberty to decide the Appeal in accordance with law. All submissions, which have been made by the learned Counsel for the Respondent herein, will be open for the Respondent to raise before the State Commission. We, however, record that the learned Counsel for the Petitioner made a statement that he shall not seek any adjournment. We, therefore, set aside the order dated 14.11.2018 passed by the State Commission and restore First Appeal No.A/1323/2017 on the file of the State Commission and request the State Commission to decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law preferably within a period of 3 months from the date when certified copy of this order is filed before the State Commission. The Revision Petition stands disposed of. Order dasti. | 
