ANIRUDH KUMAR Vs. SHALINI WIG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A complaint filed by the complainant against the appellant/OP before District Forum (South) was dismissed in complainant 's defaultvide order dated 3.3.2011. The complainant thereafter filed a restoration application, which was also dismissedvide order dated 29.11.2011, on the ground that they have no jurisdiction to pass in restoration order.

(2.) THAT is what brings the complainant in appeal before this Commission.

(3.) IT has been consistent judicial policy to adopt an attitude for lenience in dealing with the restoration application, because the purpose of law is fulfilled, only when both the parties are heard and the case is decided on merits. The appellant/complainant has sad that his Counsel was busy in an urgent matter before Hon 'ble High Court and therefore could not appear before the District Forum when the case was called out, and during this period his complaint was dismissed. It would be appropriate to treat the version of the appellant/complainant as genuine and we would therefore allow the appeal and remain the case back, setting aside the impugned, for deciding it merits. Ordered accordingly.