ORDER SHEET

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

A&N ISLANDS

PORT BLAIR

Original / Appeal Case No. 17 of 1999.

Present:           1. Justice D.K. Basu (Retd)

                            President, State Commission.

                        2. Mr. D.P. Mukopadhyaya,

                            Member, State Commission

ORDER NO: 10

Date: 27.06.2001

 Dr. B.S. Banerjee,

C/o Office of the Director (IPT)

Port Blair- 744101 (A&N).                                           ............Appellant.

            -VS-

1. General Manager (Commercial)

    Indian Airlines, Calcutta,

2. Station Manager, Indian Airlines,

    Calcutta.

3. Managing Director, Shompen Travels, Port Blair.

4. Managing Director Shompen Travels Pvt, Ltd,

Port Blair.                                                                    ..........Respondent

Mr. Hem Raj Bahadur, Advocate                    ...For Appellant.

Shri B.K. Das with Shri Sanjay Singh            …. For Respondent No. 1&2.

            The appeal is taken up for consideration when Ld. Advocate appearing for the Respondent has challenged the appeal on the point of maintainability in as much as the appeal was filed long after the statutory period.

            It appears from the record that the impugned order passed by the district Forum on 13th April 1998 and the appellant preferred the instant appeal on 29th January 1999.

            The appellant could not satisfy us as regards delay in preferring this Appeal. It has been contended by the Respondents inter alia, “That the appellant / petitioner requested his counsel to obtain the copies of the Order of the Hon’ble District Forum and only a plain copy of the Order was received by the appellant /petitioner only in the month of January, 1999. It is also submitted that the appellant / petitioner personally could not collect the copy of the award / order, as he has been pressed to duties at mainland very often between April 98 and December 98 and the circumstances were beyond his control. It is also submitted that the certified copy of the Order of the Hon’ble District Forum is also yet to be received by him.”

            Upon consideration of the pleading and also hearing, the Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant, I don’t think and that there are any sufficient grounds Showed by the appellant for condoling the delay and hence I think and hold that the appeal preferred by the appellant is hopelessly time barred and hence stands dismissed on the point of limitation.

            As the instant appeal is barred by limitation we don’t think that the merit of the appeal is required to be adjudicated. Hence; the appeal fails No order as to costs.

D.P. Mukopadhyaya                                                     Justice D.K. Basu

       Member                                                                            President