STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

HARYANA PANCHKULA

                                                First Appeal No.10 of 2022

Date of the Institution: 10.01.2022

Date of Decision: 21.01.2022

1.      Estate Officer, HUDA now HSVP (Haryana Shahri Vikas Pradhikaran), Bahadurgarh Distt.  Jhajjar.

2.      Chief Administrator, HUDA now HSVP,  Sector-6, Panchkula.

                                                                             .….Appellants.

Versus

Meena Devi W/o Shri Vijender Kumar, R/o Mata Gate, Jhajjar, Tehsil & District Jhajjar.

                                                                              .….Respondent.

CORAM:    Mr.A.S. Narang, Judicial Member.

                   Mr. Suresh Chander Kaushik, Member.

Present:-    Mr. Sikander Bakshi, counsel for the appellants.

O R D E R

A.S. NARANG, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

                   (The matter has been heard through virtual hearing).

                   This appeal is late by 1307 days. However, Appellants have filed an application for condonation of delay. 

2.                This is an appeal against the order dated 03.10.2016, whereby the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jhajjar has allowed the complaint of the complainant Smt. Meena Devi (Respondent) against the Appellants.

 3.               This appeal was filed on 10.01.2022. Along with the appeal, Appellants have filed an application for condonation of delay of 1851 days. In the application for condonation of delay, Appellants have alleged that the order dated 03.10.2016 was referred to the office of Administrator, HSVP, Rohtak for decision regarding filing of appeal and for taking further necessary action.

4.                The Administrator, HSVP, Rohtak had engaged Mr. Ajay Kaushik, Advocate  for filing one appeal, who refused to conduct the case and  requested that the case be assigned to another Advocate. Thereafter, the matter was referred to the Chief Administrator, HSVP, Panchkula for decision regarding filing of appeal and for engaging another counsel. After receiving approval from the office of Chief Administrator, HSVP Panchkula, the officials of the appellants engaged Mr. Sikander Bakshi, Advocate to prepare the draft of appeal and handed over the relevant record to him.  On the basis of the same Mr. Sikander Bakshi, Advocate prepared the grounds of appeal and sent the draft of appeal with relevant record to the office of the appellants. Appellants have also alleged that due to the outbreak of Covid-19 and lockdown instructions by the Government of Haryana and further with the restricted staff the appeal could not be filed within time. The application is also supported by an affidavit of Mr. Mohammad Imran Raza, IAS, Administrator, HSVP, Rohtak.

 5.               A perusal of the appeal shows that the Appellants had filed the application for obtaining the certified copy of the order of District Forum on 13.01.2021, which was supplied on that very day. The averments, which the appellants have made in the application, are not borne out from the record. There is nothing on the record when the appellants had contacted Mr. Ajay Kaushik and when he returned the papers.

6.                We are of the considered view that the Appellants have failed to show any sufficient cause for condoning the delay. Though this Commission is very liberal in condoning the delay, yet, in the facts and circumstance of the case, we are of the considered view that no ground is made out to condone the delay and accordingly we reject the appeal.

January 21^th, 2022                 Suresh Chander Kaushik                A S Narang                                                                Member                                              Judicial Member

                                               Addl. Bench                                        Addl. Bench  

R.K