- This revision petition has been filed under section 58(1)(b) of The Consumer Protection Act 2019 in challenge to the Order dated 05.12.2022 passed by the State Commission in F.A. No.1257 of 2019 arising out of the Order dated 15.03.2019 passed by the District Commission in complaint
no. 97 of 2018. - To facilitate better appreciation, the impugned Order dated 05.12.2022 may be quoted herein below:
Present appeal is pending for last 4 years. Ld. Counsel for the appellant was absent in part few dates. Today again Ld. Counsel for the appellant is absent. Present appeal is being adjourned for many dates because of the absence of the Ld. Counsel of the appellant. Sh. Akhilesh Trivedi Ld. Counsel for the respondent is present. Observing the absence of the Ld. Counsel of the appellant, the present appeal is being dismissed for non-prosecution. Interim order if any passed is being vacated. - It appears that the appeal filed by the petitioner / opposite party no.2 in the State Commission against the Order dated 15.03.2019 of the District Commission was dismissed in default because of non-prosecution. Submission of the learned counsel is that earlier counsel who was representing the petitioner / opposite party no.2 had stopped pursuing the matter and also appearing in the State Commission for the reasons best known to him. As a result of which, the State Commission has passed the impugned Order and dismissed the appeal in non-prosecution. Submission is that the earlier counsel did not inform about the fate of the appeal to the petitioner. In such circumstances, a new counsel was then engaged who enquired into the status of the case and also procured the certified copy of the impugned Order. Submission is that the petitioner was kept in dark and his rights will suffer irreparable prejudice in case he is not given opportunity to pursue his appeal on merits. Submission is that the petitioner has already engaged a new counsel and who shall pursue the matter in right earnest in the State Commission and the opportunity may be given to the petitioner so that the conscionable justice be done and he may place its version and arguments before the State Commission.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record including inter alia the impugned Order dated 05.12.2022 passed by the State Commission, the Order dated 15.03.2019 passed by the District Commission and also the memo of petition. 5. Ordinarily this Bench could have issued notice to the respondent(s) and would have proceeded with the matter thereafter. But such a course might have taken a very long period as it was not likely that the matter could have been taken up on an early date in the wake of heavy pendency of cases. Also, in such event the proceedings of the complaint would have to be stayed and such a course could have eventually proved detrimental to the cause of the consumer justice as the matter would have then dragged for an indefinite period of time. As the matter does not involve any complicated questions of law or facts, it would not serve much purpose to procrastinate the hearing waiting for the appearance of the respondents, therefore, the Bench finds it expedient to decide the matter on the basis of record. 6. Without making any observation about the merits of the case, lest, the same may cause any prejudice to either side and colour the vision of the fora below, in the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and in view of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Bench feels it expedient to give a further opportunity to the petitioner to appear and contest his case before the State Commission. The impugned Order dated 05.12.2022 is hence set aside and the present revision petition is allowed and the same is remitted back to the State Commission with the request to decide the same on merits after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, subject to the cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid by the petitioner / opposite party no.2 to the respondent no.1 / complainant on or before the date fixed, without fail. 7. The parties are directed to appear before the State Commission on 18.10.2023. If the cost imposed is not paid within the above stipulated period of time by the petitioner / opposite party no.2 to the respondent no.1 / complainant, the impugned Order dated 05.12.2022 passed by the State Commission shall stand as it stood. 8. The principal onus of informing the respondents about this instant Order shall be of the petitioner / opposite party no.2, it shall do so within two weeks from today, without fail, and file proof thereof before the State Commission on or before the next date of hearing before it. 9. However, if for whatever reason, the respondents do not appear before the State Commission on the date of hearing, the State Commission shall issue notice for requiring their presence in order to proceed in accordance with law in the matter, as directed by this Commission. The State Commission in such a situation may also direct the petitioner / opposite party no.2 to take adequate steps in order to facilitate service to the respondents. In case the respondents still feel to have objections to the instant Order, they may file appropriate application before the State Commission, submitting that they will raise their objection before this Commission (National Commission). In such contingency, the State Commission shall not proceed further with the appeal for a period of three months. In the said period of three months, the respondents may file appropriate application before this Commission to raise his objections. If the respondents move appropriate application in this Commission within the aforesaid period of three months, or before, further proceedings of the State Commission shall be subject to the Orders that may be passed by this Commission on such application. If the respondents do not approach this Commission in the period of aforesaid three months (or before), the State Commission shall further proceed in the matter in accordance with law. It may be observed that in case on the date fixed for hearing or any future date, the petitioner fails to appear before the State Commission personally or through his counsel or authorized representative, the State Commission shall be free to proceed with the matter as it may deem fit in accordance with law in its own discretion. 10. The Registry is requested to send a copy each of this Order to the parties in the petition and to their learned counsel within three days. The stenographer is requested to upload this Order on the website of this Commission within three days. | 
