Challenge in these proceedings is to the order dated 13.09.2011 passed by Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short he State Commission in appeal no. A/11/179. The State Commission has dismissed the application for condonation of delay of 59 days and consequently dismissed the appeal by observing as under:- ppellant and their counsel absent. Respondent / original complainant with Advocate Ms. C.H. Chitte present. In the given circumstances, we preferred to hear respondent on delay condonation application. In the application, it is simply mentioned by the applicant / appellant that the papers were submitted before the advocate who represented them before the Forum for filing an appeal but the appeal was not filed within the time and there is delay of 59 days. No reason is mentioned at all as to why such delay occurred. Therefore, we find that applicant / appellant miserably failed to show any sufficient cause to condone the delay. We hold accordingly and pass following order: Application for condonation of delay stands dismissed in the result appeal is not entertained. No order as to costs. 2. We have heard Mr. S.S. Sobti counsel for the petitioner and the respondent / complainant in person and have considered their submissions. In our view, going by the facts and circumstances of the case and the extent of delay, the State Commission ought to have been little liberal in considering the application and ought to have condoned the delay so that the appeal could be answered on merits. In the circumstances, we allow the present petition and set aside the impugned order, however, subject to a cost of Rs.15,000/- to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent and restore the appeal on the board of the State Commission for deciding the same on merits. The parties are directed to appear before the State Commission on 22.08.2012 on which date the petitioner shall pay the cost so imposed and the State Commission shall proceed to hear and decide the appeal in accordance with law.