SAMPATI INDIA INFRASTRUCTURE Vs. BIPRA CHARAN SWAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the respondent has given his vakalatanama to the Court Master which is taken on record.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that his appeal was dismissed in default as well as on merit by the State Commission vide order dated 25.06.2018, whereas, the State Commission has not examined the issues raised in the appeal and had only stated that on perusal, they are satisfied that the appeal does not have any merit. This is clearly a non-speaking order and cannot be sustained.

(3.) On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent states that though the petitioner has filed the written statement before the District Forum, however, they have not appeared after that before the District Forum. Similar thing has also happened during the appellate stage. When the impugned order was passed, the petitioner was not represented by either the party or by the Counsel and therefore, the State Commission had no option but to pass the dismissal order. The State Commission has recorded that the respondent is present in person and after hearing the respondent, the State Commission passed the order that the case does not have any merit. Therefore, it cannot be said that this is a non-speaking order.