No appeal lies under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act against an order rejecting an application for restoration of a complaint dismissed in default.

Mr. Justice S.S. Sandhawalia, President— Whether an appeal under Section 15 of the Act lies against the order of the District Forum rejecting an application for restoration of a complaint dismissed in default earlier? This is the significant threshold question in this appeal.

2. Since the question aforesaid is pristinely legal, the facts would pale into relative insignificance and may be noticed with utmost brevity. The appellant had preferred complaint No. 125 of 1991 before the District Forum, Hisar which after some adjournment came up for hearing on the 20th of February, 1992. On the said date, the appellant did not chose to come present whilst the learned Counsel for the opposite party put in appearance and made an application for rejecting the complaint in default. The District Forum noticed that the case had been repeatedly called out and no appearance was being put in on behalf of the appellant and consequently dismissed the complaint for want of prosecution on the date aforesaid.

3. After nearly 21/2 months of the dismissal aforesaid, an application dated the 6th of May, 1992, was moved on behalf of the appellant for the restoration of the complaint. This was strenuously opposed on behalf of the opposite party both on legal and factual grounds. The District Forum in its considered order first opined that there appeared to be no enabling section or rule to restore a complaint dismissed in default. It however, proceeded further to examine the question on its facts and merits and held that the appellant had not come to the District Forum with clean hands and further there was an unexplained delay of 2½ months in making the application for restoration, and on this factual position also the application was rejected.

4. The present appeal has been directed against the aforesaid order dated the 27th of August, 1992. The preliminary question of its very maintainability thus inevitably arises at the very threshold. Mr. Pardeep Bedi, the learned Counsel for the respondent strenuously took up the stand that no appeal is warranted under Section 15 of the Act against an order of the nature aforesaid.

5. Mr. G.S. Bhatia, the learned Counsel for the appellant has vehemently contended that the present appeal is competent under Section 15 of the Act. With considerable literality, it was urged that the said section envisaged an appeal against any and every order passed by the District Forum. The submission was that whether such an order was merely the rejection of an application or the adjudication on merits of a complaint, the same could be equally the subject-matter of the appeal. Reliance was sought to be placed by way of a somewhat remote analogy on II (1991) CPJ 633 (NC), R.P. Singh v. Janta Store & Ors. and I (1992) CPJ 356, T.P. Chaturvedi v. Deomani Kotedar.

6. At the very outset we must notice that the question herein is of some significance and wider ramification within the consumer jurisdiction. It is not entirely free from difficulty and as yet appears to be res integra, In any case, inspite of repeated opportunities given to the learned Counsel no decision of the National Commission or any other State Commission covering the issue on all fours could be cited before us. Inevitably, the matter has, there- fore, to be examined on the larger scheme and language of the Section and on general principles. Consequently, it would be apt to set out the provisions of Section 15 for facility of reference:—

"Appeal—Any person aggrieved by an order made by the District Forum may prefer an appeal against such order to the State Commission within a period of thirty days from the date of the order, in such forum and manner as may be prescribed;

Provided that the State Commission may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing it within that period."

7. In seeking the clue to its meaning in the interpretative exercise for the aforesaid section, the larg