NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/2543/2005

C.R.APPARNA - Complainant(s)

Versus

MASTER VIJAY KAMATH - Opp.Party(s)

T.S.SHANTHI

09 Oct 2009

ORDER

Date of Filing: 28 Sep 2005

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. No. RP/2543/2005
(Against the Order dated 18/03/2003 in Appeal No. 304/2003 of the State Commission Karnataka)
1. C.R.APPARNAMADIKERI TALUK TALUK ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. MASTER VIJAY KAMATH M SHANTHI KAMATH COLLEGE ROAD MADIKERI KADAGU DISTT. ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHAN ,PRESIDENTHON'BLE MR. B.K. TAIMNI ,MEMBER
For the Appellant :T.S.SHANTHI
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 09 Oct 2009
ORDER

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.

These revision petitions were clubbed together for hearing with revision petition No.3459-3517/2008.  Since we are disposing of these revision petitions on the ground of Delay, the same are separated.

          These revision petitions have been filed with a delay of 823 days which is over and above the statutory period of 90 days given for filing the revision petition.  Under the Consumer Protection Act,1986 authority under the Act is supposed to decide the complaint/appeal within 90 days from its filing where no evidence is required to be taken and in case where evidence is required to be taken, within 150 days.  The inordinate delay of 823 days cannot be condoned without sufficient cause being shown.  We have gone through the application for condonation of delay.  We are not satisfied with the cause shown.  Dismissed on the ground of ‘Delay’.

            It needs to be observed that the petitioner had filed the appeals before the State Commission with a delay of 182 days.  The State Commission has dismissed the appeals on the ground of Limitation.  The statutory period given for filing the appeal is 30 days.  Delay of six times over the period given for filing the appeal could not have been condoned.  The State Commission is right in dismissing the appeals on the ground of delay.



......................JASHOK BHANPRESIDENT
......................B.K. TAIMNIMEMBER