Maharashtra

StateCommission

A/12/2

RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD - Complainant(s)

Versus

KAMLESH GAJANAN INAMDAR - Opp.Party(s)

KMC LEGAL

11 Apr 2012

ORDER

BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
 
First Appeal No. A/12/2
(Arisen out of Order Dated 14/09/2011 in Case No. 323/2011 of District Kolhapur)
 
1. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD
CORPORATE OFFICE 570 RECRIFIER HOUSE NAIGAUM CROSS ROAD WADALA WEST MUMBAI 400031
MUMBAI
MAHARASHTRA
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. KAMLESH GAJANAN INAMDAR
VISHWANATH HOUSE SOCIETY FLAT NO C-10 RAJARAMPURI 5 TH LANE TAKALA KOLHAPUR
KOLHAPUR
MAHARASHTRA
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 Hon'ble Mr. P.N. Kashalkar PRESIDING MEMBER
 Hon'ble Mr. Dhanraj Khamatkar Member
 
PRESENT:Mr.Nikhil Mehta,Advocate, Proxy for KMC LEGAL , Advocate for for the Appellant 1
 
Mr.S.A.Patil-Advocate a/w.Mr.Amit Badkar-Advocate
......for the Respondent
ORDER

Per Hon’ble Mr.P.N.Kashalkar, Presiding Judicial Member

Applicant/Appellant has filed this appeal challenging the judgement and award passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kolhapur in consumer complaint no.323/2011 dated 14/09/2011. 

In filing this appeal there has been delay of 33 days and, therefore, Misc.application no.MA/12/1 has been filed.  In the condonation of delay application, it is mentioned that there is delay of 33 days in filing the appeal.  In para 4 of the misc.application for condonation of delay it has been specifically mentioned that the appellant received copy of the impugned order on 26/09/2011.  So cut off date was 25/10/2011 to file the appeal within 30 days but appeal came to be filed on 02/01/2012.  So we calculated delay and there is delay of 68 days in filing the appeal.  We asked appellant how is it that they were seeking condonation of delay of 33 days only when delay was of 68 days.  Since the application has been drafted along with the affidavit seeking condonation of delay of only 33 days, we are of the view that this delay application cannot be allowed because delay is of 68 days, whereas the applicant/ appellant is seeking delay of 33 days in filing the appeal.  Even the grounds mentioned therein are not sound enough to condone the delay of 33 days. Leave apart, delay of 68 days has occurred actually in filing the appeal.  In the circumstances, we are not inclined to allow condonation of delay application. Hence the following order:-

                                      ORDER

Misc. application no.MA/12/1 for condonation of delay is rejected. 

Consequently, appeal does not survive for consideration.

Pronounced on 11th April, 2012.

 
 
[Hon'ble Mr. P.N. Kashalkar]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
[Hon'ble Mr. Dhanraj Khamatkar]
Member

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.