IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NOs:10863 & 10910 of 2009 W.P.No.10863 of 2009 Between: K.Ramachandra Rao, S/o. Polu Raju, R/o. 21, Gandhi Road, S1 Opp: Bus Terminal, Mogeppair East Chennai. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Dr. Mindala Venkateswarlu, Geenral Surgeon, Preeti Nursing Home, A.G.College Road, Lane Beside Suryalanka bus Stand Bapatla, guntur District. 2 Yashoda Super Specialty Hospital rep by its Managing Director, Raj Bhavan Road, Somajiguda Hyderabad. 3 Dr. M.Venkateswara Rao, Consultant Physicial Raj Bhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 4 Dr. B.Sudhakar, Consultant Nephrologist Raj Bhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 5 Dr. Govind R.Varma, Consultant Gastroenterlogist, Raj Bhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 6 New India Assurance Co.Ltd., Divisional Office 5-2-174/2, Madan Mohan Buildings, R.P.Road, Secunderabad. 7 The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd., C Box, Hyderabad, Public Garden Road, Above Dunlop Building, Nampally, Hyderabad. 8 New India Assurance Co., Divisional Office, Vth Floor, Surya Towers, S.P. Road, Secunderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly a Writ in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 30.01.09 passed by the A.P. State Consumer Redressal Commission, Hyderabad in F.A.No.892 of 2006 thereby confirming the order dated 22-05-2006 in C.D.No.1014 of 2004 passed by District Forum-III, Hyderabad as illegal and improper and consequently quash the same. W.P.NO:10910 of 2009 Between: Chairman & Managing Director Apollo Hospital Jubilee Hills,Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 A.Rajendra Kumar S/o.Panduranga Suri Yarajpalli(V) Bodhan (M) District Nizamabad 2 Dr.Suresh Menon (Opthalmalogist) Appolo Hospital Jubliee Hills, Hyderabad 3 The United India Insurance Company Ltd through its Branch Manager Branch Office 2-4-1/4/1 Floor, M.G Road Secunderabad .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugned order dt.30-01-09 passed by the A.P State District Consumer Redressal Forum Nizamabad as illegal and improper and consequently quash the same. Counsel for Petitioners in both W.Ps.: M/S INDUS LAW FIRM Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is filed seeking Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 30.01.2009 passed by the A.P. State Consumer Redressal Commission, Hyderabad in F.A.No.892 of 2006 confirming the order dated 22.05.2006 in C.D.No.1014 of 2004 passed by District Forum-III, Hyderabad as illegal and improper. The petitioner approached the A.P. State Consumer Redressal Commission by filing F.A.No.892 of 2006 challenging the legality and validity of the order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-III, Hyderabad, in C.C.No.1014 of 2004. Since the petitioner failed to follow-up the matter, the said F.A. was dismissed for default for non-prosecution, which reads as follows. “None appears for the appellant despite the fact that the matter is posted under the caption of dismissal. The appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.” The present writ petition is filed on the ground that A.P. State Consumer Redressal Commission has no power or jurisdiction to restore the appeal, which was dismissed by it for default/non- prosecution. The Supreme Court in New India Assurance Company Limited v. R. Srinivasan[1] while dealing with the provisions of the A.P. Consumers Protection Act, 1986, and after following the judgment of the Full Bench in Narsingh Das v. Mangal Dubey[2] held that in the absence of the complainant, the Court will be well within the jurisdiction to dismiss the application for non-prosecution, so also, it would have inherent power and jurisdiction to restore the complaint on good cause being shown for non-appearance of the complainant. In the above circumstances, when once the Court has dismissed the matter for default/non-prosecution, the very same Court has got power to restore the same. In view of the same, the writ petition cannot be entertained on the ground that the State Commission has no jurisdiction. The petitioner, therefore, can approach the State Commission with an appropriate application. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is dismissed. ________________________ (GHULAM MOHAMMED, J.) ___________________________ (VILAS V. AFZUL PURKAR, J.) 8th June, 2009 [1] (2000) 3 SCC 242 [2] ILR (1883) 5 All 163