The court allowed the restoration of an original application previously dismissed for default, emphasizing the rights of the applicant to pursue their case.

Sathish Ninan, J.

The original application under the Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act , 2003 was dismissed for default. The application seeking its restoration, was dismissed by the Tribunal. The order is under challenge by the applicant-petitioner.

2. We have heard Shri.K.P.Sudheer, the learned Standing Counsel on behalf of the applicant-petitioner and Shri.Nagaraj Narayanan the learned Special Government Pleader (Forests) on behalf of the respondent-State.

3. The original application was posted to 10.03.2025 for evidence. On that day, the applicant was not present and the case was adjourned to 21.03.2025, for evidence as last chance. Even on that day the applicant failed to appear, and the original application was dismissed for default. On 07.04.2025, the applicant filed I.A.No.74 of 2025, seeking restoration of the original application back to file.

4. The Tribunal noted that the original application is of the year 2010 and that there was no proper representation on the day on which the original application was posted for evidence. The Tribunal observed that the applicant being an institution, an authorised representative ought to have been present. Holding the non-appearance to be willful, the restoration application was dismissed.

5. In the impugned order, the Tribunal has noticed that the counsel for the applicant was present on 21.03.2025. We do notice that the matter was posted for evidence as last chance and that as observed by the Tribunal, the witnesses ought to have been present on that date. But the fact remains that the applicant had filed I.A.No.3 of 2025 to receive a witness list and formal orders were not passed thereon. The said application was also ordered on 21.03.2025, closing the same for non-appearance of any representative of the applicant. As noticed by the Tribunal, the original application is of the year 2010. The applicant would not stand to gain by allowing the original application to be dismissed for non-prosecution; in fact they run a serious risk. The explanation given by the applicant that they were under the impression that evidence would commence only after orders on I.A.No.3 of 2025, namely, the application to receive witness list cannot be totally brushed aside. The application for restoration has been filed well within time. We are of the opinion that an opportunity can be granted to the applicant to prosecute the original application and enable a disposal on merits.

Resultantly, the original application is allowed. The orders on I.A.No.74 of 2025 and I.A.No.3 of 2025 will stand set aside and the applications will stand allowed. The parties will appear before the Tribunal on 03.11.2025. The Tribunal shall proceed for trial and dispose of the original application. Needless to say that the witnesses of the applicant shall be present on 03.11.2025, before the Tribunal, to enable taking of evidence.