Per – Hon’ble Mr. P. N. Kashalkar, Presiding Judicial Member
Heard Adv. Santosh Patil on behalf of the Applicant/Appellant and Adv. Priya Borgaonkar on behalf of the Non-Applicants/Respondents on the application for condonation of delay.
[2] This is an appeal filed by the original Complainant challenging the order dated 25/7/2011 passed by the Central Mumbai District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (hereinafter referred to as ‘the District Forum’ for the sake of brevity) dismissing his Consumer Complaint No.18 of 2011, Mr. S. Natarajan Vs. Allahabad Bank. In filing this appeal, there is a delay of 44 days on the part of the Applicant/Appellant and as such, the Applicant/Appellant has filed Miscellaneous Application No.557 of 2011 seeking condonation of delay. In the application for condonation of delay, supported by an affidavit, the Applicant/Appellant simply mentions that he received copy of the impugned order on 23/8/2011 through post. In paragraph (02) of the delay condonation application the Applicant/Appellant mentions that because of severe heart problem since the month of June-2008 he was under treatment for that from the month of August-2011 and as such, he was unable to file the appeal within time. The Applicant/Appellant, therefore, says that since he was under treatment up to 15/10/2011 there is a delay of 44 days in filing the appeal and the delay may be condoned. In support of the application for condonation of delay a certificate dated 15/10/2011 issued by Dr. Anil M. Kanojia has been appended to the application. In that certificate, Dr. Anil Kanojia mentions that the Applicant/Appellant had undergone ‘Coronary Artery Angioplasty’ at JaslokHeartHospital in the month of June-2008 and the Applicant/Appellant is undergoing routine one yearly check-up with him. He found that the Applicant/Appellant was under extreme stress during the examination done in the month of August-2011 and the Applicant/Appellant had been advised to take complete bed-rest at home under medical supervision. Facts which are mentioned by Dr. Anil Kanojia are also not categorically mentioned in the application for condonation of delay. In the application for condonation of delay it is simply mentioned that the Applicant/Appellant was under treatment for heart problem from the month of August-2011 and, therefore, he was unable to file the appeal in time. So, the application for condonation of delay is containing one thing and medical certificate issued by Dr. Anil Kanojia is containing another thing. These two documents have no nexus what-so-ever. It is not the case of Dr. Anil Kanojia that during the period 23/8/2011 to 15/10/2011 the Applicant/Appellant was treated as an indoor patient. The Applicant/Appellant was simply advised to take complete bed-rest at home. During this period, the Applicant/Appellant could have very well approached an advocate and could have filed an appeal within time. In our view there is no sufficient cause to condone the delay of 44 days in filing the appeal. Certificate dated 15/10/2011 issued by Dr. Anil Kanojia is a bought-up certificate procured by the Applicant/Appellant to explain the delay of 44 days and nothing else.
In the circumstances, we pass the following order:-
ORDER
Miscellaneous Application No.567 of 2011 seeking condonation of delay in filing Appeal No.952 of 2011 hereby stands rejected. Consequently, the appeal does not survive for consideration.
Inform the parties accordingly.
Pronounced and dictated on 06th March, 2012
