We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

Ordinarily, we would have called upon the respondent to support the impugned order of the State Commission and show cause as to why the appeal be not admitted or allowed.  However, this is rather a strange case in which even on perusal of the impugned order, we find it difficult to pinpoint any single reason ascribed by the State Commission to indicate application of judicial mind to factual position and legal submissions of the parties.  The appeal came to be dismissed by the State Commission by making a general observation that no deficiency was noticed in the order of the District Consumer Forum.  The impugned order shows absence of “why part” and shows mere presence of “what part”.  It is not known which judicial process was followed.  The “non-speaking order” is against the principles of natural justice and as such we are inclined to allow the appeal and to remand the matter at the stage of admission itself. This we are doing in order to avoid further waste of time and by way of exception.

We, therefore, allow the petition.  The impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the State Commission with direction to re-admit the appeal, consider the same on merits and to decide the same by giving due reasons in support of its order.  The appeal is disposed of.