No one appears for the petitioner though counsel for the respondent is present.  In the circumstances, we have heard the counsel for the respondent and have considered the grounds set up in the Revision Petition.  In order to assail the impugned order dated 21.01.2008 passed by the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore, counsel for the respondent submits that the order passed by the State Commission dismissing the application for condonation of delay and in turn the appeal is fully justified on record.  We also think so.  In our view no sufficient cause was shown by the petitioner entitling them for condonation of undue delay of 123 days in filing the appeal.  The State Commission was therefore fully justified in not exercising its judicial discretion in favour of the petitioner in the matter of condonation of delay.

The Revision Petition as such is dismissed as debarred of any merits.  The respondent shall be entitled to withdraw the deposited amount in this Commission pursuant to the directions given by this Commission and to execute the order for the recovery of the balance amount.