EICHER TRACTOR LTD Vs. LATE CHITRANJAN PRASAD SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order dated 25/26.9.2001 of Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Bihar, Patna dismissing application for restoration of Appeal No. 438 of 1993 filed by the petitioner, one of the opposite parties. We have heard the parties' Counsel.

(2.) Impugned order (copy at pp. 1-2) would show that on 6.12.1999, the appeal was postponed to 21.2.2000. In the application seeking restoration of appeal, it was alleged that Mr. R.P. Agarwal appearing for petitioner mistook the date as 21.4.2000 instead of 21.2.2000 and, therefore, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner on 21.2.2000, 8.3.2000 and 23.3.2000 on which date the appeal was ultimately dismissed in default. Taking note of the facts that affidavit of the Clerk of Mr. Agarwal and not that of Mr. Agarwal, Advocate was filed in support of the allegations made in application and no step for substitution of the L.R. of deceased respondent/complainant was taken, the application was dismissed by the order under appeal. A party should not suffer for the fault of his Lawyer. Further, there was no basis for disbelieving the stand taken in application that Mr. Agarwal mistook the date of hearing as 21.4.2000 instead of 21.2.2000. That being so, the impugned order deserves to be set aside, being erroneous.

(3.) Accordingly, while allowing revision aforesaid order dated 25/26.9.2001 is set aside and case remanded to the State Commission for appeal being decided afresh on merits. Parties are directed to appear before the State Commission for direction on 16.7.2003. Revision Petition allowed.