Per Justice Mr.S.B. Mhase, Hon’ble President Heard Mr.Baliram Kamble, Advocate for the applicant/complainant. 2. This is a delay condonation application filed to condone the delay of six years three months & sixteen days in filing complaint. The complaint has been filed by wife of deceased Vazir Jafferali Dhanani. Husband of the applicant/complainant had suffered railway accident on 30/06/2004 and died. Thereafter, claim bearing No.466/2004 was lodged as against Railway before the Railway Claims Tribunal. It was filed on 09/09/2004. Said claim was decided by order dated 21/07/2010. The Railway Claims Tribunal had granted an amount of `4 Lakhs by way of compensation. Thereafter having recovered said amount from the Railway, present complaint has been filed on 16/10/2012 with a delay condonation application as stated above. 3. In a delay condonation application, it is stated that applicant/complainant lady is unaware of the law and she was not educated and it was very difficult for her to understand and get knowledge to go through all the process work every time. The applicant/complainant had to rush here and there from one department to another to get all the documents to complete the legal process and then it is submitted that balance of convenience lies in her favour. It is further stated that she had suffered an accident on 11/06/2011 and was admitted in the hospital and has undergone an operation on 02/07/2011 and therefore, delay may please be condoned. In fact illness or hospitalization is of the year 2011. The accident of her husband had taken place in 2004 and immediately claim was lodged with the Railway Claims Tribunal. Similarly, the applicant/complainant could have filed present claim against the Insurance Company. However, said claim was not filed. There are no valid reasons and sufficient cause for not filing the claim with the Consumer Fora. This is an afterthought application filed after having received `4 Lakhs as compensation from the Railway Claims Tribunal. Though we have sympathy with the family of the deceased as they have lost their family member in the accident, yet it is not a case of ignorance of law. They were very well aware of the fact that compensation can be claimed and accordingly they have claimed and have recovered also. This is a belated attempt on the part of the applicant/complainant to recover another compensation without any valid reason. Therefore, delay condonation application stands rejected. -: ORDER :- 1. Misc. Application No.370/2012 for condonation of delay stands rejected. Consequently, complaint No.294/2012 does not survive for consideration. 2. No order as to costs. 3. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties. Pronounced Dated 21st November 2012. | 
