Aggrieved by the dismissal of his complaint by the Jharkhand State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ranchi (in short, the State Commission’) the original complainant has filed the present appeal. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and considered his submissions. The appeal has been filed after a long ..2.. delay of 441 days and counsel for the appellant tried to explain the said delay on the premise that soon after the passing of impugned order, the appellant had approached the Jharkhand High Court by means of writ petition no. 1640/09 which was disposed of by the said High Court vide order dated 21.04.09 observing that the appellant has an alternative and efficacious remedy by means of appeal before the National Commission. Though the order was passed on 21.04.09 but the present appeal has been filed only on 03.02.10, i.e, after about 10 months from the date of passing of the order by the Jharkhand High Court. Assuming that under some mis-conception the appellant had filed the writ petition before the Jharkhand High Court but still he is not able to explain the further delay of about 10 months in filing the present appeal. In these circumstances, we are not inclined to condone the delay in filing the present appeal. Even if we do so, we do not find any good ground to entertain the present appeal because it is apparent from the record that the respondent Airlines cannot be said to have committed any deficiency in service in case in the hand. The action of the concerned staff members of the Airlines in offloading the wife of the complainant when they ..3.. noticed her sick, was quite justifiable. In any case, the authorities of the Indian Airlines had done whatever was expected of them in order to help the complainant and her wife so much so that they arranged ambulance for shifting the wife of the complainant to the Medical College, Jammu for her treatment and management after giving her first aid at the airport itself. In our view, the order passed by the State Commission is eminently justified and does not suffer from any illegality or material irregularity which calls for any interference. Accordingly, first appeal is dismissed.