AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Karuna Nand Bajpayee, Presiding Member
This revision petition has been filed in challenge to the Order dated 29.02.2024 in in CMP No. 745/2023 in FA Sr. No. 1265/2023 of the State Commission Tamil Nadu.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record including inter alia the impugned Order dated 29.02.2024 of the State Commission.
A perusal of the record shows that the challenge is to an order of the State Commission vide which the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.
For better appreciation the impugned Order is quoted hereinbelow:-
“No representation for the petitioner / appellant/5th Opposite party.
This petition has been filed by the petitioner / appellant to condone the delay of 49 days in filing the appeal.
This matter is posted today for appearance of the petitioner / appellant, 1st respondent & 2nd respondent, for filing counter of Respondents 1, 2, 4 & 5 and for enquiry or for dismissal.
Today, when the matter was called at 10.30 A.M., the Petitioner / Appellant was not present. Hence, passed over and called again at 01.00 PM. Still there is no representation for the Petitioner / Appellant. Hence, I am of the view that keeping the petition pending is of no use as the Petitioner / Appellant is not interested in prosecuting the case.
Hence, CMP No.745/2023 is dismissed. Consequently, the F.A. Sr. No.1265/2023 is rejected. No costs. ”
Normally the court would have issued notice to the other side but as the matter does not involve any complicated questions of facts or law, and involves only the principles of natural justice, the appeal having been dismissed in non-prosecution in the absence of petitioner / appellant, the Bench deems it appropriate to dispose of the matter on the basis of record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has elaborated upon the reasons and circumstances which prevented the petitioner / appellant and its counsel from appearing in the State Commission. Submission is that the petitioner / appellant has a good case on merits but same have remained unadjudicated. It has been contended that if opportunity be provided to pursue the appeal on merits and of being heard there are fair prospects of the appeal being allowed by the State Commission or else the petitioner / appellant shall be left remediless and its cause shall suffer irreparably. It has also been submitted that the appeal shall be pursued in right earnest henceforth and no further occasion to default shall be occasioned.
In view of the totality of facts and circumstances of the case without making any observations on merits of the case lest it may cause any prejudice to either side and colour the vision of the State Commission, it is deemed expedient in the interest of justice that a further opportunity be provided to the petitioner/ appellant for adjudication of its appeal on merit in the State Commission, lest it be left remediless. Thus the Order dated 29.02.2024 of the State Commission is set aside subject to payment of cost of Rs. 50,000/- to be paid by the petitioner / appellant / opposite party no. 5 to the complainant / respondent no. 1 either directly or through the State Commission on or before the date fixed, without fail.
The matter is remitted back to the State Commission with the request to restore the appeal on its original number and decide the same on merits in accordance with law after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to both the parties.
The petitioner / appellant is sternly advised to conduct its case in the right earnest with due diligence.
It may be observed that if the petitioner /appellant or its legal representative fails to appear before the State Commission on any future date the State Commission in its discretion may proceed further in accordance with law as it may deem appropriate.
The parties shall appear before the State Commission on 29.08.2024.
The principal onus of informing the respondents of this instant Order shall be of the petitioner. 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.
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 require the petitioner to take adequate steps in order to facilitate service on the respondents.
In case the respondent no.1 / complainant still feels to have objections to the instant Order, he may not accept the cost imposed vide this order and instead of accepting the same, he may file appropriate application before the State Commission, submitting that he will raise his 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 respondent no. 1 / complainant may file appropriate application before this Commission to raise his objections.
If the respondent no. 1 / complainant moves 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 respondent no. 1 / complainant 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.
The Registry is requested to send a copy each of this Order to all parties in this petition and to the learned counsel for the petitioner as well to the State Commission. The stenographer is requested to upload this Order on the website of this Commission immediately.