AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
16 paragraphs · 629 wordsAbove noted application has been filed by petitioner for restoration of the restoration application, which was dismissed in default due to non-appearance of the petitioner on 17.04.2015.
Present revision petition was filed defective in the year 2013. Various opportunities were granted to the petitioner to remove the defects, which later on petitioner removed those defects.
Petitioner was Opposite Party before the District Forum. After receipt of notice by the petitioner, one Shri Anuj Sharma appeared before the District Forum and filed his vakalatnama. Thereafter, neither any reply was filed nor anybody appeared on behalf of the petitioner.
District Forum, allowed the consumer complaint filed by the respondent/complainant against the petitioner.
Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum, petitioner filed appeal before the State Commission, which upheld the order of District Forum and dismissed the appeal.
Hence, this revision petition.
Vide order dated 12.12.2013 passed by this Commission, petitioner was directed to file certain documents and matter was adjourned to 07.02.2014. On 07.02.2014, counsel for petitioner sought further time to file the documents. Hence, four weeks'' time was granted being the last opportunity. On 06.05.2014, again petitioner did not comply with previous order and further adjournment was granted subject to payment of 2500/- as cost to be deposited within two weeks. On 19.08.2014, none was present on behalf of the petitioner. Thus, the following order was passed; "The matter was passed over.
On the second call, there is no appearance on behalf of the petitioner. On 07.02.2014, following order was passed:-
"Original record of District Forum has been received. Counsel for petitioner seeks further time to place on record copy of notice along with envelope which was received from the counsel for the respondent. Last opportunity is given to counsel for the petitioner to file the same, within four weeks. Adjourned to 6.5.2014 for admission hearing."
Order dated 07.02.2014, has not been complied with till date. Moreover, adjournment cost of Rs.2,500/- imposed upon the petitioner, vide order dated 06.05.2014 has also not been deposited till date. Due to non-appearance of the petitioner and non-compliance of orders dated 07.02.2014 and 06.05.2014 respectively passed by this Commission, present revision petition stands dismissed in default as well as for non-compliance of the above orders."
Thereafter, petitioner filed M.A. No.557/2014 for restoration of the petition. That application was listed for hearing on 17.04.2015. Again, on that date, none appeared for the petitioner. Moreover, order dated 19.08.2014 was not complied by the petitioner. Therefore, application for restoration of the petition was dismissed in default.
Hence, the present application.
It is manifestly clear from the record, that petitioner has been pursuing this litigation in a very casual and careless manner. Firstly, after appearing before the District Forum, petitioner did not file any reply and as such, complaint was decided in the absence of reply the petitioner. Thereafter, before this Commission, petitioner has adopted dilatory tactics and has failed to
comply the order passed by this Commission in spite of various opportunities granted to him. It appears, that only intention of petitioner is to delay the proceeding and not to comply with order dated 13.09.2012 passed by the District Forum against the petitioner. Petitioner is bent upon harassing the respondent/complainant. Under these circumstances, no ground whatsoever is made out for restoring the application for restoration of the revision petition. The present application, having no merit at all is hereby dismissed with cost of 5,000/- for wasting time of this Commission.
The cost be deposited by the petitioner by way of demand draft in favour of "Consumer Legal Aid Account" of this Commission, within six weeks failing which petitioner shall be liable to pay an interest @ 9% p.a.
List for compliance on 17.07.2015. .
