(Per Shri S.R.Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member)
(1) There is a delay of 54 days in filing the appeal and hence the application for condonation of delay is made. Heard Adv.S.Pardes for the applicant/appellant and Adv.V.P.Shastri for the non-applicant/respondent No.1/original complainant. Non-applicant/respondent No.2 & 3 are absent. One advocate’s clerk appeared for the non-applicant/respondent No.2 & 3 but he is not a registered clerk of the advocate on record.
(2) Heard the parties present on delay condonation application.
(3) The delay is tried to be explained stating that after receipt of certified copy of the impugned order in July 2011, they searched the record pertaining to the consumer complaint referring to M/s.Swan Mills Ltd. and there is a delay. This fact is not contradicted by the contesting non-applicant/respondent No.1. It is fairly submitted that it will serve the purpose if some costs are awarded to non-applicant/appellant No.1.
(4) Referring to the record, we find that the delay occurred is caused because the concerned authority took time to trace the records. Delay is also neither intentional nor malafides could be attributed to the applicant/appellant. We hold accordingly and pass the following order.
ORDER
(1) The application for condonation of the delay is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal stands condoned.
(2) Applicant/appellant and non-applicant/respondent Nos.2 & 3 to bear their own costs and Applicant/appellant shall pay costs of `5,000/- to the non-applicant/respondent No.1. Costs to be paid within 4 weeks.
Pronounced on 11th February, 2013.
