NCDRC

NCDRC

FA/590/2012

M. SELVARAJU - Complainant(s)

Versus

MIOT HOSPITAL & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

MRS. PRIYA ARISTOTLE

10 Oct 2012

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
FIRST APPEAL NO. 590 OF 2012
 
(Against the Order dated 24/02/2012 in Complaint No. 9/2006 of the State Commission Tamil Nadu)
1. M. SELVARAJU
NO. 95-B, KALAIYAGAM, RAILWAY STATION ROAD,
PATTUKKITTAI-614
THANJAVUR DISTRICT.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus 
1. MIOT HOSPITAL & ANR.
NO. 4/112, MOUNT POONAMALLE ROAD, MANAPAKKAM,
CHENNAI-600089
2. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
THROUGH ITS BRANCH MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE AT KHANJANCHI KA CHAURAHA ELLESLEGANJ,
MIRZAPUR
U.P
3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
DIVISION OFFICE AT LAHURABIR
VARASANI
4. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
REGIONAL OFFICE AT JEEVAN BHAWAN PHASE-II, NAVAL KISHORE ROAD, HAZRATGANJ
LUCKNOW-226001
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHAN, PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. VINEETA RAI, MEMBER

For the Appellant :
Ms. L. Priya Aristotle and Mr.Joseph
Aristotle, Advocates
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 10 Oct 2012
ORDER

There is a delay of 121 days in filing the Appeal, which is over and above the period of 30 days, which is statutorily given to an aggrieved party to file the Appeal.  The only explanation given for condonation of delay is that the appellant received the copy of the order passed by the State Commission in the end of August 2012; that the advocate who represented the appellant before the State Commission fell sick and suffered loss of memory; that the appellant had to wait for his recovery to retrieve the file and papers from him. 

Under the Consumer Protection Act, the District Forum is supposed to decide the complaint within a period of 90 days from the date of filing and, in case, some expert evidence is required to be led, then within 150 days.  Where the statute has permitted only 30 days for filing the Appeal, the delay, more than four times over the statutory period, cannot be condoned until and unless some sufficient ground is shown. 

        Supreme Court in a recent judgment, Anshul Aggarwal vs. New Okhla Industrial Development Authority – IV(2011)CPJ 63 (SC) has held that while deciding the application filed for condonation of delay, the Court has to keep in mind that the special period of limitation has been prescribed under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for filing appeals and revisions in consumer matters and the object of expeditious adjudication of the consumer disputes will get defeated if the appeals and revisions which are highly belated are entertained.  Relevant observations are as under:

“It is also apposite to observe that while deciding an application filed in such cases for condonation of delay, the Court has to keep in mind that the special period of limitation has been prescribed under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for filing appeals and revisions in consumer matters and the object of expeditious adjudication of the consumer disputes will get defeated if this court was to entertain highly belated petitions filed against the orders of the consumer foras.”

 

In view of the above decision rendered by the Supreme Court, Application for condonation of delay is dismissed.   Consequently, the appeal is dismissed as barred by limitation. 

 

 
......................J
ASHOK BHAN
PRESIDENT
......................
VINEETA RAI
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.