1.      Heard counsel for the petitioner. 

2.      The above revision has been filed against the order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra dated 29.10.2018 passed in appeal no. A/16/106.  The office has reported that there is a delay of 1519 days in filing the revision.  The petitioner has filed IA/7942/2023 for condoning the delay.  In the IA, the petitioner stated that petitioner no.1 handles the management of office of Reward Real Estate Company and petitioner no.2 is its employee. Shri Pravinkumar Tayal is a heart patient and due to physical weakness and ill health of the petitioner and he was unable to contact his counsel.  In November, 2022, the petitioner appeared through his earlier counsel Shri Bhushan Bhendarkar, Advocate before Additional Consumer Disputes Forum, Nagpur then it was learnt that respondent failed to deposit Rs.1262580/- in compliance of the order of Appellate Forum and the matter was posted for compliance of the order of the Appellate Forum.  Thereafter, the parties submitted their proposal through their counsel that the matter was likely to be compromised between them.  The respondent was ready to get back his booking amount along with 12% interest w.e.f. 03.11.2012 from the petitioners in view of the order of the Additional Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nagpur.  Earlier, Government of Maharashtra declared Corona pandemic since 16.03.2020 and restriction continued till October 2022. 

          In the result, their counsel did not appear before the District Forum, Nagpur nor it was settled between them.  In the meantime, District Forum issued warrant to appear against the petitioner. Accordingly, Shri Bhushan Bhendarkar, Advocate made enquiry on 25.01.2023 in the office of the Appellate Forum regarding progress of the appeal. Then the counsel learnt that the State Consumer Commission, Maharashtra at Nagpur had passed the order dated 29.10.2018 partly allowing the appeal and directing the respondent to pay balance consideration of Rs.1142580/- + other charges to the petitioners and to get execution of sale deed of shop no.205.  The petitioner applied for certified copy of the order on 27.01.2023 and received copy of the order of State Commission on 09.02.2023 and District Forum on 17.02.2023. Thereafter, the petitioner suffered from some viral disease from 18.02.2023 to 25.05.2023 and the counsel for the petitioner could not get some necessary instructions from the petitioner during this period. On 26.05.2023, the counsel got the material instructions from him.  Then revision was prepared and filed on 13.06.2023. 

3.      I have perused the condonation of delay application and the impugned order dated 29.10.2018.  State Commission has noticed that the petitioner put in appearance in the appeal through Mr. Vijay Lalwani, Advocate on 24.10.2016.  From 14.06.2017, nobody was appearing in the appeal although the appeal was adjourned eight times upto 14.06.2017.  This fact has not been disputed by the petitioner.  The impugned order was passed on 29.10.2018.  There was no reason for the petitioner to enquire about the impugned order from a new counsel in November 2022, when they had already engaged a counsel.  Although it has been stated that the parties submitted their proposal for compromise through their counsel but no such proposal given by the respondent has been filed.  Free copy of order dated 29.10.2018 was issued on 16.01.2019.  Service of free copy of the order dated 29.10.2018 is also not denied.  When Mr. Saurabhkumar Tayal was handling management then illness/weakness of Mr. Pravinkumar Tayal is not relevant.

          There is absolutely no explanation of the delay from 29.10.2018 till 15.03.2020.

Condonation of delay application is rejected.   

Revision is dismissed as time barred.   

          The District Forum shall expedite the execution proceedings.