(Delivered on 30/03/2022)

PER SHRI A. Z. KHWAJA, HON’BLE JUDICIAL  MEMBER.

1.         Applicant – Mr. Dharmendra Reddi has preferred the present appeal challenging the impugned order dated 14/03/2016 passed by the learned Additional District Consumer Commission, Nagpur under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  Along with the appeal the present appellant /applicant has also moved an application for condonation of delay in preferring the appeal.

2.         We have heard  Mr. Alwani, learned advocate for the appellant /applicant  on the application  for condonation of delay. We have also gone through the contents of the application for condonation of delay.  We find that the impugned order came to be passed by the learned Additional District Consumer Commission in Consumer Complaint No. CC/2015/98 on 14/03/2016 and application for condonation of delay came to be filed on 17/01/2019. Ongoing through  the application,  we constrained  to  observe that  no proper  explanation  much less any satisfactory  explanation  has been provided  for the delay in  preferring the appeal.   It is now well settled  by the catena of decisions  that  the applicant  has to give proper  an satisfactory  explanation  for delay by  taking into consideration  the provisions of the Consumer  Protection Act, 1986. As such  in the absence of  any proper  or satisfactory  explanation, application  for condonation of delay is hereby  rejected. Consequently, appeal is dismissed.