AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner - opposite party, and perused the material on record.
This revision petition has been filed against the Order dated 05.02.2019 of the State Commission, whereby the State Commission dismissed the first appeal before it in default:
Dated : 05 Feb 2019
Final Order / Judgment
Respondent No. 1 is present in person. None appears for the Appellant. No reply to show cause is filed by the Appellant as per order dated 7.1.2019. Under the circumstances, the Appeal is dismissed for default.
We are of the considered view that first appeal before the State Commission, arising from the Order dated 16.09.2014 of the District Forum, should, as far as (lawfully) feasible, be comprehensively and holistically examined on merit, on facts and law, with the affording of the due opportunity to both the sides, and should also be speedily disposed of, without unwarranted and unnecessary impediments.
In the interest of justice, and for holistic and comprehensive adjudication of the first appeal on merit, on facts and law, the impugned Order dated 05.02.2019 of the State Commission is set aside. The appeal is restored to its original number. The revision petitioner- opposite party is allowed one (more) opportunity to appear before the State Commission. The afore shall, but, be subject to just and reasonable cost.
In respect of cost we inter alia also note the proceedings before the State Commission, which read as below:
Dated: 22 Oct 2014
ORDER NO. 1 DT. 22.10.14
Ld. Advocate for the Appellant is present and heard. The Appeal is within time. The Appeal is admitted and be registered. Issue notice upon the Respondent by Speed Post with A/D fixing 25.3.2015 for S/R.
Dated: 25 Mar 2015
ORDER
ORDER NO. 2
Ld. Advocate for the Appellant is present. One Ms. Latika Debnath appears on behalf of the sole Respondent and undertakes to file Letter of Authority on the next occasion. S/R matter being complete fix 9.2.2016 for hearing of the Appeal and filing of BNAs. Parties are to exchange their BNAs as per regulation.
Dated: 09 Feb 2016
ORDER
Order No. 3
Appellant is present through the Ld. Advocate. Mr. Utpal Roy Chowdhury, the Ld. Advocate undertakes to file Vokalatnama on behalf of the sole Respondent and prays for time. It is submitted by the Ld. Advocate for the Appellant that he will file one Misc. Application. Fix 26.04.2016 for hearing of the Misc. Application, if filed.
Dated : 26 Apr 2016
ORDER
ORDER NO. 4
Ms. Sayantani Das, Ld. Advocate enters appearance on behalf of the Appellant and undertakes to file fresh Vokalatnama with no-objection from the erstwhile Ld. Advocate on the next occasion. Fix 23.6.2016 for hearing of the Misc. Application for substitution of the legal heirs of the sole Respondent, since deceased, and also for filing fresh Vokalatnama on behalf of the Appellant.
Dated : 23 Jun 2016
ORDER
ORDER NO. 5
Appellant in person is present. Fix 14.09.2016 for hearing of the Misc. Application regarding substitution of the legal heirs of the sole Respondent and also for filing Vokalatnama on behalf of the Appellant.
Dated : 14 Sep 2016
ORDER
Order No. 6
Mr. Abhishek Chakraborty, the Ld. Advocate files fresh Vokalatnama on behalf of the Appellant and files an affidavit stating that the erstwhile Ld. Advocate for the Appellant is not willing to give no objection in the aforesaid matter. Let the Vokalatnama filed by the Ld. Advocate for the Appellant be kept with the record. Fix 16.12.2016 for hearing of the Misc. Application. Objection, if any, in the meantime.
No. 7/16.12.2016
Appellant is present through the Ld. Advocate. On the prayer of the Ld. Advocate for the Appellant fix 07.02.2017 for hearing of the Misc. Application.
Dated : 07 Feb 2017
ORDER
ORDER NO. 8
None appears. Fix 9.3.2017 for hearing of the Misc. Application No. MA/625/2016 as a last chance.
Dated : 09 Mar 2017
Final Order / Judgement
Order No. 9
Appellant is present through the Ld. Advocate. The Ld. Advocate for the Appellant submits that she is not pressing this Misc. Application bearing No. 625/2016 and prays for time to file another Misc. Application. Prayer is allowed. The Misc. Application is dismissed as not pressed. Fix 02.05.2017 for hearing of the Misc. Application, if filed.
Dated : 02 May 2017
Final Order / Judgement
Order No. 10
Appellant is present through the Ld. Advocate. Misc. Application bearing No. 344/2017 is taken up for hearing. By filing this application the Appellant has prayed for substitution of the legal heirs of the deceased sole Respondent. Having heard the Ld. Advocate and on perusal of the papers on record, we allow this application. The names of the legal heirs mentioned in Schedule be substituted in place and stead of the deceased sole Respondent. Bench clerk is directed to make necessary incorporation in the cause title of the memo of appeal. Appellant is directed to file amended version of memo of appeal. Misc. Application is thus disposed of. Fix 25.05.2017 for filing affidavit of service in respect of substituted legal heirs of the deceased Respondent and also for filing amended version of memo of appeal.
Dated : 25 May 2017
ORDER
Order No. 11
None appears on behalf of the Appellant. Respondent No. 1 appears in person. Fix 18.07.2017 for filing affidavit of service in respect of substituted Respondent No. 2 and also for filing amended version of memo of appeal.
Dated : 18 Jul 2017
ORDER
Order No. 12
Appellant is present through the Ld. Advocate. Respondent No. 1 is present in person. The Ld. Advocate for the Appellant files amended version of memo of appeal. Copy served. On the prayer of the Ld. Advocate for the Appellant fix 25.10.2017 for filing affidavit of service in respect of substituted Respondent No. 2.
Dated : 25 Oct 2017
ORDER
Order No. 13
Appellant is present through the Ld. Advocate. Respondent No. 1 is present in person and files letter of authority on behalf of the Respondent No. 2. S/R is thus complete. Fix 12.03.2018 for hearing. BNA to be exchanged as per Regulations.
Dated : 12 Mar 2018
ORDER
ORDER NO. 14
Ld. Advocate for the Appellant is present. Mr. Utpal Roychowdhury, Ld. Advocate, enters appearance on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 by filing a Vokalatnama and prays for time. Fix 3.7.2018 for hearing of the Appeal. BNAs in the meantime.
Dated : 03 Jul 2018
ORDER
ORDER NO. 15
Ld. Advocates for Appellant and Respondent No. 1 are present. Ld. Advocate for the Respondent No. 1 submits that the Respondent No. 2 has died. Fix 7.8.2018 for taking steps by the Appellant regarding substitution of the legal heirs of the deceased Respondent No. 2.
Dated : 07 Aug 2018
ORDER
Order No. 16
Appellant and Respondent No. 1 are present through their Ld. Advocates. Fix 14.09.2018 for taking steps in respect of deceased Respondent No. 2.
Dated : 14 Sep 2018
ORDER
Order No. 17
None appears on behalf of the Appellant. Fix 28.11.2018 for taking steps in respect of deceased Respondent No. 2.
Dated : 28 Nov 2018
ORDER
Order No. 18
Appellant through Ld. Advocate and Respondent No. 1 in person are present. On the prayer of the Ld. Advocate for the Appellant fix, 17.12.2018 for taking steps in respect of deceased Respondent No. 2 as a last chance.
Dated : 17 Dec 2018
ORDER
ORDER NO. 19
Ld. Advocates for Appellant and Respondent No. 1 in person are present. Fix 7.1.2019 for taking steps by the Appellant in respect of the deceased Respondent No. 2 as a special chance.
Dated : 07 Jan 2019
ORDER
Order No. 20
None appears on behalf of the Appellant. Respondent No. 1 is present through the Ld. Advocate. Appellant is directed to show-cause as to why the appeal shall not be dismissed for non-compliance of the Court's order fixing 05.02.2019 for filing reply to show-cause/taking steps by the Appellant in respect of the deceased Respondent No. 2 as a special chance.
Dated : 05 Feb 2019
Final Order / Judgment
Respondent No. 1 is present in person. None appears for the Appellant. No reply to show cause is filed by the Appellant as per order dated 7.1.2019. Under the circumstances, the Appeal is dismissed for default.
In the totality of the case, we find cost of Rs. 50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) to be just and reasonable. The same shall be paid by the revision petitioner - opposite party to the respondent no. 1 - complainant no. 1 directly in her name by way of 'payee's a/c only' demand draft within seven weeks from today without fail.
Subject to the cost being duly paid within the stipulated period, and subject to the State Commission being thus satisfied, the State Commission may kindly proceed further with the adjudication of the first appeal before it on merit as per the law.
The revision petitioner - opposite party is sternly advised to conduct its case professionally before the State Commission.
The instant decision, to restore the first appeal before the State Commission subject to cost, may be viewed in the correct perspective; it may not be treated as a licence by the revision petitioner - opposite party for unprofessional conduct of its case before the State Commission.
And, specifically, the State Commission may kindly exercise its wisdom in imposing cost and / or in dismissing the case in default if the revision petitioner - opposite party (the appellant before the State Commission) in any manner conducts its case unprofessionally or absents itself from proceedings before the State Commission, at any time in the further adjudication of the case.
Needless to add that in the contingency that the cost imposed (Rs. 50,000/-) is not paid within the stipulated period (7 weeks from today), the instant revision petition shall stand failed and the State Commission's impugned Order dated 05.02.2019 shall stand confirmed.
The parties shall appear before the State Commission on 28.08.2019.
The principal onus of informing the respondents - complainants of this Order shall be on the revision petitioner - opposite party.
In case the respondents - complainants have any objection to the first appeal being restored subject to cost, as afore, the proceedings before the State Commission shall not commence and both sides (i.e. the petitioner - opposite party and the respondents - complainants; all) shall appear before this Commission on 17.09.2019, for this Commission to hear the objections of the respondents - complainants and to pass appropriate Order.
The Registry is directed to send a copy each of this Order to the State Commission and to the respondents - complainants forthwith.
In case the respondents - complainants are not present on the date fixed i.e. 28.08.2019 before the State Commission, the State Commission is requested to kindly issue fresh notice to the respondents - complainants, and to ensure its due service, and in all contingencies its 'dasti' service through the revision petitioner - opposite party and also through publication by the revision petitioner - opposite party, before proceeding further to adjudicate the case on merit as per the law.
'Dasti', in addition, to facilitate timely compliance.