Order No.04

Complainant himself and Ld. Advocate of the complainant is present.

The application for condonation of delay u/s 5 of the Limitation Act relating to this case is taken up for hearing.

The Ld. Advocate appearing for the complainant mainly tried to highlight that the complainant is a super senior citizen and is suffering from old age problem. He also highlighted that complainant paid an amount of Rs. 22,000/- against membership to the OPs on 15.01.2015 and the said amount was only paid against the assured assurance of OPs that in case if the complainant is unable to avail the tour facilities provided by the OPs due to ill health, then OPs will make refund total sum immediately without deducting any charges whatsoever and in the meantime complainant got his health deteriorated and complainant could not move out of his own residence as per advice of doctor verbally not to mover or avail any long journey and as such complainant immediately contacted OP 1’s office and submitted a letter on 31.12.2015 with a request to refund his money but OPs did not refund the same. It is also highlighted by the Ld. Advocate of the complainant that in spite of issuance of notice by the Assistant Director, Consumer Affairs and Fair Business Practices Department, Kolkata, dated 05.06.2017 OPs did not prefer to attend the mediation meeting arranged by the concerned authority. It is also submitted by the Ld. Advocate of the complainant that during the end of 2019 to middle of year 2022 there was a severe outbreak of Pandemic Covid-19 and it was not possible for the complainant to move out of his place of residence and after relaxation complainant has filed this instant complaint on 21.06.2023 and Ld. Advocate of the complainant also submitted that it is crystal clear that complainant was reasonably prevented from filing the complaint before this Commission and the delay is not at all intentional on the part of the complainant and as such the prayer u/s 5 of the Limitation Act of the complainant may kindly be allowed.

First of all it may be noted that in paragraph no.3 of the instant application under consideration it is specifically mentioned that doctor advice was verbal. Obviously it is hard to belief and appreciate to the fact that any doctor will advise to a senior citizen simply verbally. Obviously medical jurisprudence is saying something different and no medical advice prescription whatsoever is forthcoming against the alleged ground of the complainant. Moreover, the period shown (end of 2019 to middle of year of 2022) in connection with the Covid-19, it may be stated that in the year 2019 there was no outbreak of Covid-19. In all fairness it may be stated that outbreak of Covid-19 prevailed in our country from the March, 2020 up to the end of 2021 at best. But still we are saying that there is no explanation for another six months for the year 2022. It is a settled principles of law settled by the Apex Court that each and every days delay should be explained properly. In fact, this Commission is not in a position to appreciate the grounds taken by the complainant in connection with the prayer for condonation of delay.

Considering the entire materials on record this Commission is of the view that the prayer for condonation of delay is not at all appreciable and thus, liable to be rejected.

Accordingly, the prayer for condonation of delay u/s 5 of the Limitation Act of the complainants stands rejected.

Accordingly, the petition of complaint filed by the complainant on 21.06.2023 is becoming infructuous.

Dictated and Corrected by

[HON'BLE MR. Shri Sankar Kumar Ghosh]
PRESIDENT