Learned counsel for the petitioner moved application for deletion of respondent no. 4. Application is allowed and respondent no. 4 is deleted from the array of the parties. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent no. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the State Commission, vide impugned order dated 23.05.2011 on account of absence and review petition filed by the petitioner was also dismissed by order dated 20.03.2013, against which this Revision Petition has been filed and submitted that order dismissing appeal may be set aside and appeal may be restored at its original number. Respondent no. 2 submitted that he has no objection if impugned order is set aside and appeal is restored except objection regarding costs. Perusal of record reveals that Revision Petition was dismissed in default on the ground that even after uploading cause list on website, none appeared for the petitioner, though learned counsel for the respondent appeared. Strictly speaking, appeal should not have been dismissed only on the basis of uploading cause list on the website but notice should have been given to the petitioner for further proceedings. In such circumstances, order dated 23.05.2011 passed by the State Commission is set aside. As far order dated 20.03.2013 is concerned, this order dismissing the review application is in accordance with law, which does not call for any interference and in such circumstances, Revision Petition to the extent of challenging order dated 20.03.2013 is dismissed. Consequently, Revision Petition filed by the petitioner is partly allowed and impugned order dated 23.05.2011 passed by the State Commission in Appeal no. 1696/2006, State Bank of India vs. M/s. Offset Printing House & Ors. is set aside and appeal is restored at its original number, subject to payment of Rs. 5,000/- as costs to respondent no. 2. Parties are directed to appear before State Commission on 21.10.2013.