On payment of entire consideration amount by the complainant/respondent, petitioner allotted land for shop to him on 14.11.1995.  Instead of allotting the plot on 100 ft. wide road, plot was allotted on 30 feet wide road.  It was also alleged that the rebate of 2% as well as the priority in allotment was not given to the respondent.  Petitioner did not appear in spite of service and was proceeded ex parte.  District Forum allowed the complaint in part.  Being aggrieved, petitioner filed appeal before the State Commission which has been dismissed by the impugned order.

        This revision petition has been filed with an inordinate delay of 878 days, which is over and above the period of 90 days statutorily given to file the Revision Petition.  Under the Consumer Protection Act, the consumer fora are required to decide the cases in summary manner within a time frame, i.e., within 90 days from the date of filing, in case, no expert evidence is required to be taken, and, within 150 days, wherever expert evidence is required to be taken.  The only reason given for condonation of delay is that the certified copy of the impugned order was received along with legal opinion of the counsel by the clerk of the petitioner on 26.5.2010; that no action was taken by the concerned clerk for filing the revision petition; that the petitioner came to know about non-filing of the revision petition only during the execution proceedings.  We are not satisfied with the cause shown.  The delay is more than the period prescribed for filing the complaint.  

Supreme Court, in a recent judgment, Anshul Aggarwal vs. New Okhla Industrial Development Authority – IV(2011)CPJ 63 (SC) has held that while deciding the application filed 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 the appeals and revisions which are highly belated are entertained.  Relevant observations are as under:

“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.”

The inordinate delay of 878 days cannot be condoned without sufficient cause being shown. Application for condonation of delay is dismissed.   Consequently, the Revision Petition is dismissed as barred by limitation.