24.07.2023

ORDER ON ADMISSION

Mr. RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

The appellant/Opposite Party has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the Order dt.05.11.2022 passed in CC.No.824/2019 on the file of III Additional Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bengaluru to call for the records of the District Commission for proper adjudication of the matter by allowing the appeal in the interest of justice and equity.

2.     The office has noted that there is a delay of 193 days in preferring the appeal and appellant sworn affidavit that the said delay is not intentional, but, for bonafide reasons, hence, prayed to condone the delay in filing the appeal.

3.     On perusal of the affidavit sworn by the appellant, the grounds urged for non-filing of the appeal well within time is not satisfactory. The appellant has not established before this Commission that the appeal is filed belatedly due to unavoidable circumstances.  Mere administrative delay is not the ground to condone the delay. If at all the appellant decides to prefer an appeal, he shall file an appeal within 45 days as contemplated in the Consumer Protection Act. The reasons assigned in the affidavit are not reasonable/ satisfactory and the delay is fatal to the appeal. 

4.     In view of the decision rendered by the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission reported in 2018(2) CPR 507 (NC) the matter between M/s TDI Infrastructure Ltd., v/s Kulvinder Singh Bahl, the appeal can be dismissed on the point of delay alone.  Accordingly, the appeal deserves to be dismissed on the point of enormous delay. Hence, the following;

ORDER

The appeal is hereby dismissed on delay at the stage of admission.

Forward free copies to both parties.

(Sunita .C. Bagewadi)         (Ravishankar)        

           Member                    Judicial Member

P *