DATE OF DISPOSAL: 08.10.2024

            The advocate for the Petitioner is present and filed a memo with citation of Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi reported in 2019(4) CPR 224. The Commission heard and perused the petition and documents available in the case record.

It is revealed from the record that, the Petitioner filed this Review Application to review the order dated: 08.04.2024 in C.C.No.:8 of 2024 under Sec. 40 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The said section stated that, “Sec.40 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 - The District Commission shall have the power to review any of the order passed by it if there is an error apparent on the face of the record, either of its own motion or on an application made by any of the parties within thirty days of such order.” The petitioner has filed the instant case on 20.08.2024 after elapse of thirty days of the date of receipt: 22.04.2024 of the order dated: 08.04.2024 in C.C.No.:8 of 2024. However, the Commission has admitted the Review Application in view of the catena of judgments held by the Apex Court of India that, “the Consumer Protection Act is a ‘social benefit-oriented’ legislation and courts have to adopt a constructive, liberal approach while construing the provisions of this law.”

It is apparent from the case record that, there is no any error found on the face of the case record in the order which was passed on 08.04.2024. For just and proper adjudication of the case, the Commission perused the citation mentioned supra which was filed by the Petitioner in support of the case. The Hon’ble National Commission through the light on the important point of law i.e., “delay in filling complaint must be condoned where reasons given by Appellant are satisfactory and explanation appears to be bonafide.” In this present case there were no satisfactory cause of delay for filling of the case has been mentioned by the Petitioner in his petition. The each day of delay must be explained since the date of cause of action. In the instant case, the petitioner has not filed any such reasons and explanation to condone the inordinate delay 9 years satisfactorily and it is not appearing bonafide. The petition of the petitioner is not consonance with the above citation and the said citation is not befitting in the present case.

2. The Commission is relying upon a Judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No: 6216 of 2024 in between M/s Renuka Multipack Private Limited v. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. reported in https://indiankanoon.org/doc/45917455/ inclined to allow the present application.  The Commission found that there is inordinate delay of 9 years in filling of the complaint and there is also no justifiable reason to condone the delay. The application seeking condonation of delay is rejected. The application is sans merit. Hence, the review application is dismissed on the ground of delay as well as on merits.