Maharashtra

StateCommission

MA/11/461

SHRI RAM TRANSPORT FINNANCE DO LTD - Complainant(s)

Versus

ARIF NOORMOHAMMD ALAS - Opp.Party(s)

VIVEK R DATTA

15 Mar 2012

ORDER

BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
 
Miscellaneous Application No. MA/11/461
 
1. SHRI RAM TRANSPORT FINNANCE DO LTD
101-105 SHIV CHAMBERS SECTOR 11 CBD BELAPUR NAVI MUMBAI
THANE
MAHARASHTRA
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. ARIF NOORMOHAMMD ALAS
R PATIL PLOT PET BHAG GAWALI GALLI SANGLI
SANGLI
MAHARASHTRA
2. SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE CO LTD
KOLHAPUR BRANCH NEAR KOLHAPURST BUS STAND KOLHAPUR
KOLHAUR
MAHARASHTRA
3. MANAGER SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE LTD
SANGLI BRANCH OPP DISTT BOARD PUDHARI BHAVAN SANGLI
SANGLI
MAHARASHTRA
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 Hon'ble Mr. P.N. Kashalkar PRESIDING MEMBER
 Hon'ble Mr. Dhanraj Khamatkar Member
 
PRESENT:Adv. Rajesh Kanojia alongwith Adv. S. P. Bharti for the Applicants/Appellants
 None for the Non-Applicant/Respondent
ORDER

Per – Hon’ble Mr. P. N. Kashalkar, Presiding Judicial Member

 

          Adv. Rajesh Kanojia alongwith Adv. S. P. Bharti is present on behalf of the Applicants/Appellants.  He files service affidavit in terms of Section 28-A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as regards service of notice of delay condonation application to the Non-Applicant/Respondent.  Notice issued to the Non-Applicant/Respondent is returned with postal endorsement – ‘Not Claimed’.  Relying upon service affidavit filed today we hold that there is good service of notice of delay condonation application on the Non-Applicant/Respondent.  Non-Applicant/Respondent is absent today.  We heard Adv. Rajesh Kanojia alongwith Adv. S. P. Bharti on behalf of the Applicants/Appellants on the application for condonation of delay.

 

[2]     In filing an appeal bearing No.753 of 2011 there is an alleged delay of 04 days on the part of the Applicants/Appellants and to seek condonation of delay, the Applicants/Appellants have filed Miscellaneous Application No.461 of 2011.  Application for condonation of delay is supported by an affidavit sworn by Mr. Nityanand Shankar, Constituted Attorney of the Applicants/Appellants.  In the application for condonation of delay the Applicants/Appellants have stated the grounds as to why they could file the appeal within the prescribed period of limitation and as to how there was a delay of four days in filing the appeal occurred.  Relying upon the affidavit we hold that this is a fit case wherein delay of four days in filing the appeal needs to be condoned by allowing Miscellaneous Application No.461 of 2011 subject to certain costs since the Non-Applicant/Respondent has not come forward to contest this delay condonation application.

 

          Hence, we pass the following order:-

 

ORDER

 

Miscellaneous Application No.461 of 2011 seeking condonation of delay in filing Appeal No.753 of 2011 is hereby allowed.  Consequently delay in filing appeal stands condoned subject to payment of costs of `1,000/- to be deposited by the Applicants/Appellants into Legal Aid Fund of State Commission within a period of 30 days from today (since the order is passed in presence of Learned Counsel for the Applicants/Appellants) and failing which without any further reference to the State Commission the application for condonation of delay shall automatically stands dismissed.

 

 

Pronounced and dictated on 15th March, 2012

 

 
 
[Hon'ble Mr. P.N. Kashalkar]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
[Hon'ble Mr. Dhanraj Khamatkar]
Member

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.