Ram Chand vs Financial Commissioner/Revenue, Punjab

Jawahar Lal Gupta, J.—On December 17, 1993 the appeal filed by the present petitioners was dismissed in default. On December 20, 1993 an application for restoration was filed. It was inter-alia averred that the appellant could not be present at the time the case was called as he had gone to the washroom. This application was dismissed by the Chief Settlement Commissioner vide his order dated March 31, 1994. The petitioners filed a revision petition before the Financial Commissioner. It was dismissed on the ground that there were ten appellants and only one of them has tried to explain his absence. The petition had been filed only by the two out of the ten appellants. Thus, the revision petition was dismissed. Copies of the orders of the Chief Settlement Commissioner and the Financial Commissioner have been produced as Annexures P2 and P7 respectively. The petitioners alleged that there was sufficient cause for the restoration of the appeal and that the dispute should have been decided on merits. The respondents have erred in not deciding the case after examination of the factual position. They pray that both the orders be quashed and that the Chief Settlement Commissioner be directed to decide the appeal on merits.

Notice of motion was issued. A written statement has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3. No reply has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 4 to 7 despite opportunity. No one has appeared on behalf of respondent No. 8 despite service. She is proceeded against ex-parte.

Counsel for the parties have been heard.

It is true that the petitioners were not present before the appellate authority on December 17, 1993 when the case was called. However, the application for restoration was filed without any delay on December 20, 1993. In the circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that the case should have been restored and the matter should have been decided on merits.

Resultantly, we set aside the orders dated March 31, 1994 and July 27, 1999. The case is remanded to the Chief Settlement Commissioner-respondent No. 2 for a decision on merits. Parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the Chief Settlement Commissioner on March 16, 2001.

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs.

Petition disposed of.