This order shall dispose of both the aforesaid revision petitions as the facts and point of law involved in them are similar/same. Complainants/respondents purchased 35 kg. paddy seeds of Basmati Rice “Sugandha-4” (1121) from Rajkiya Seeds Depot, Mangalore/respondent No.3, a dealer of the petitioner. Respondents showed the seeds but 40% of the seeds were not of the good quality as a result of which respondents suffered a loss of 3 quintals per bigha costing Rs.79,200/-. Respondents lodged the complaint with respondent No.2 who inspected the fields of the complainants and found that 40% crops were of another quality than the Sugandha and complainants suffered loss due to ad-mixture. Respondents feeling aggrieved filed complaint before the District Forum claiming a sum of Rs.79,200/-. -4- District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the opposite parties including the petitioner to pay a lump-sum compensation of Rs.50,000/- alongwith interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint till realization. Petitioner being aggrieved filed the appeal before the State Commission. State Commission dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution on 16th September, 2011. Petitioner moved a miscellaneous application No.148/2011 seeking restoration of the appeal, which was also dismissed for non-prosecution. Petitioner, thereafter filed a miscellaneous application No.154/2011 seeking recall of the order dated 30th September, 2011, which has been dismissed. Petitioner being aggrieved has filed the present revision petitions. On a statement made by the counsel for the petitioner that the orders of the fora below be set aside, subject to payment of cost to the respondents/complainants, limited -6- notices were issued to the respondents to show cause as to why the impugned order be not set aside, appeals restored and the case remitted back to the State Commission for a fresh decision in accordance with law. Petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs.8,000/- to the complainants/respondents. Counsel for the respondents stated that the litigation cost of Rs.8,000/- has not been paid by the counsel for the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner states that litigation expenses have been deposited in the District Forum as the respondents refused to accept the same. For the reasons stated in the revision petitions and in the interest of justice, the orders passed by the State Commission dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution and the subsequent orders passed on the miscellaneous -7- applications, are set aside and the appeals are restored, subject to payment of Rs.7,500/- in each of the appeals. Parties through counsel are directed to appear before the State Commission on 24.4.2012. Petitioner is directed to pay the cost of Rs.7,500/- to each of the complainants/respondents alongwtih litigation expenses of Rs.8,000/- on the date of appearance before the State Commission. After the payment of cost and the litigation expenses to the complainants/respondents, petitioner would be at liberty to withdraw the amount of litigation expenses deposited by it with the District Forum. Revision petitions disposed of in above terms. | 
