1.       This appeal under section 19 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is in challenge to the Order dated 02.03.2020 of the State Commission in complaint no. 387 of 2012.

2.       We have heard learned counsel for the appellant (the ‘complainant’) and the learned counsel for the respondents (hereinafter referred to as the ‘bank’) and have perused the material on record including the impugned Order dated 02.03.2020 of the State Commission.

4.       Vide its Order of 02.03.2020 the State Commission has dismissed the complaint for non-appearance and non-prosecution. The said Order is reproduced below for reference:

“Dated : 02.03.2020

Present : None

C-387/2012

No one has appeared on behalf of complainant despite awaiting.

Perusal of records shows that no one has appeared on behalf of complainant for the last five dates of hearing i.e. 23.10.2017, 11.05.2018, 26.11.2018, 28.05.2019 and 29.08.2019. It appears that complainant is not interested in pursuing the present complaint. Accordingly, present complaint stands dismissed for non-appearance and non-prosecution.

File be consigned to Record Room.”

5.       Learned counsel for the complainant submits that the complainant has a good case on merit and wants opportunity to present its case before the State Commission. Submission is that the complainant will prejudicially suffer irreparably if the complaint is not restored and it may eventually lead to complete miscarriage of justice leaving the complainant remediless and helpless. 

6.       Learned counsel for the bank opposed the plea for restoration on the ground that many opportunities had been given to the complainant.

7.       Having objectively and impartially considered the nature of the dispute and the overall facts and circumstances as are being borne out by the record, it is deemed to be just and conscionable that opportunity be provided to the complainant for getting the matter adjudicated on merit before the State Commission.

This Commission is consciously refraining from detailing the facts or critiquing the matter since the dispute is as yet to be adjudicated on merit and it does not wish to in any manner colour the vision of the forum below.

8.       The Order dated 02.03.2020 of the State Commission is set aside and the complaint is restored to its original number before the State Commission.

The complainant is advised to conduct its case with due diligence before the State Commission.

The complainant and the bank are directed to appear before the State Commission on 18.03.2024.

The State Commission is requested to issue notice afresh to the bank and to adjudicate the complaint, as per the procedure, on merit, in accordance with the law.

9.       The Registry is requested to send a copy each of this Order to the parties and to their learned counsel immediately. It is also requested to forthwith send a copy of this Order to the State Commission by the fastest mode available.