Circuit Bench Nagpur

StateCommission

FA/12/424

Shri raju Shrihari Dongare - Complainant(s)

Versus

Chief Manager Maharashtra state seeds Corporation ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Adv Mrs Swati Paunikar

23 Jul 2013

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA CIRCUIT BENCH AT NAGPUR 5 TH FLOOR, ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING NO. 1 CIVIL LINES, NAGPUR-440 001

First Appeal No. FA/12/424 (Arisen out of Order Dated 29/02/2012 in Case No. cc/11/115 of District Wardha)   1. Shri raju Shrihari Dongare R/o Mahavir ward Arvi Wardha ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Chief Manager Maharashtra state seeds Corporation ltd Mahabeej Bhavan Krushi Nagar Akola Akola ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:     HON'ABLE MR. B.A. Shaikh, Judicial PRESIDING MEMBER   HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL MEMBER   HON'BLE MR.N. ARUMUGAM MEMBER

PRESENT: Adv Mrs Swati Paunikar, Advocate for the Appellant 1

ORDER  Adv.Mrs.Paunikar present for the appellant. None present for the Respondent. Respondent’s advocate has sent application for adjournment by Email, but we are not inclined to grant adjournment. We have heard advocate for the appellant on the condonation of delay application in which delay shown is of 150 days in preferring the appeal. The Ld.advocate of the appellant submitted that the copy of the impugned order dated 29 February,2012 was received by the appellant on 6th of March,2012, but for want of fund the appeal could not be filed by the appellant within time. She further submitted that as the appellant is a poor person, the delay of 150 days occurred in making arrangement for funds and hence the delay may be condoned. The appeal has been filed on 5/10/2012 and, therefore, the delay of 182 days has been occurred in filing the appeal. We find that it is an inordinate delay and it can not be condoned on the ground that the appellant is a poor person and he has no funds. No statutory amount is required to be deposited alongwith the appeal memo when the appeal is filed for enhancement of the compensation granted by the District Forum below. The complaint shows that the complainant is having sufficient agricultural land and it can not be believed that he had no funds for filing the appeal. Therefore, we hold that the inordinate delay of 182 days can not be condoned. Accordingly, the following order is passed. ORDER The application made for condonation of delay is rejected. The appeal is dismissed as time barred.

[HON'ABLE MR. B.A. Shaikh, Judicial] PRESIDING MEMBER   [ HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL] MEMBER   [ HON'BLE MR.N. ARUMUGAM] MEMBER