20/02/15

HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. KALIDAS MUKHERJEE, PRESIDENT          

            This order relates to hearing on the petition for condonation of delay of 850 days.  It has been stated in the petition for condonation of delay that on the expiry of the period of 373 days the Appellant Bank duly credited the principal sum of Rs.2,30,000/- and also the interest to the tune of Rs.22,605.39 against the FD in the savings bank account of the Respondent on 12/07/08.  The complaint case was disposed of by the Learned District Forum on 03/02/12 with the direction as mentioned in the judgment upon the Appellant.  The Appellant appeared before the Learned District Forum in the execution case no.83 of 2013 and filed an affidavit stating that the FD account was opened for 373 days by the Respondent and on its maturity the Appellant duly paid the maturity value to the Respondent.  Under the circumstances, the delay occurred in filing this Appeal. 

            None appeared on behalf of the Respondent. 

            We have heard the submission made by the Learned Counsel and perused the papers on record.  It appears that the judgment in case no.CC 143 of 2009 was passed by the Learned District Forum, Kolkata, Unit-I on 03/02/12 and the certified copy was applied for on 02/07/14.  On the same date the copy was delivered.  The complaint case was allowed on contest by the Learned District Forum.  The OP/Appellant having contested the complaint case before the Learned District Forum did not prefer Appeal u/s 15 within the statutory period.  As to the delay in applying for certified copy there is no reasonable explanation. 

The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Anshul Aggarwal Vs. New Okhla Industrial Development Authority reported in IV (2011) CPJ 63 (SC) has been pleased to observe as follows:

“It is also apposite to observe that while deciding an application filed in such cases for condonation of delay, the Court has to keep in mind that the special period of limitation has been prescribed under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for filing appeals and revisions in consumer matters and the object of expeditious adjudication of the consumer disputes will get defeated if this Court was to entertain highly belated petitions filed against the orders of the consumer Foras.”

Having heard the Learned Counsel and on perusal of the papers on record, we find that the inordinate delay of 850 days in filing the Appeal u/s 15 of the C. P. Act, 1986 has not been sufficiently explained.

            The petition for condonation of delay is rejected.  Consequently, the Appeal being time barred also stands dismissed.