ORAL ORDER BELOW MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.145 OF 2015 SEEKING CONDONATION OF DELAY FOR FILING FIRST APPEAL NO.294 OF 2015
Per – Hon’ble Smt. Usha S. Thakare, Presiding Judicial Member
We have heard learned Adv. Digamber Ramchandra Thakare on behalf of the Applicant/Appellant and learned Adv. Shyam A. Maheshwari on behalf of Non-Applicant/Respondent at length on the application for condonation of delay.
[2] Applicant/Appellant has preferred an appeal to challenge an order dated 05/09/2014 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Pune partly allowing Consumer Complaint No.245 of 2013. However, there is a delay of 69 days in filing the appeal and, therefore, the Applicant/Appellant has preferred an application for condonation of delay.
[3] Non-Applicant/Respondent has filed his reply and has opposed the application for condonation of delay.
[4] According to the Applicant/Appellant, free copy of order was made available on 11/09/2014. Applicant/Appellant is an insurance company. After perusal of the order, Applicant/Appellant decided to file an appeal and accordingly, instructed their counsel at New Delhi to draft the memorandum of appeal. Thereafter, counsel for the Applicant/Appellant at New Delhi drafted the appeal memo and it was sent to corporate office of the Applicant/Appellant at Bengaluru for signing the appeal memo and affidavit. Process of sending the documents took place through a private courier. Counsel for the Applicant/Appellant at New Delhi then, sent the appeal memo to local counsel at Maharashtra to file the appeal. It appears that due to sending of documents from one office to another time of 69 days was spent. Said delay does not appear to be intentional or deliberate. It is settled principle of law that while doing justice, much importance cannot be given to technicalities. It is always desirable to decide a case on merit. In case, delay in filing appeal is condoned, no prejudice will be caused to the Non-Applicant/Respondent as both parties will get reasonable opportunity, as per law, to put-forth their case on merit. Inconvenience, if any, caused to the Non-Applicant/Respondent can be compensated in terms of money by saddling the Applicant/Appellant with reasonable costs. Hence, we are inclined to allow the application for condonation of delay.
In the result, we pass the following order:-
ORDER
Miscellaneous Application No.145 of 2015 seeking condonation of delay for filing
First Appeal No.294 of 2015 is hereby allowed. Consequently, subject to payment of delaying costs of Rs.5,000/- by the Applicant/Appellant to the Non-Applicant/Respondent, as a condition precedent, within a period of one month from the date of this order, delay in filing appeal stands condoned.
Subject to payment of costs, list this appeal for hearing on admission on 16/10/2015.
At this stage, learned counsel for the Applicant/Appellant prays for grant of stay to execution of the impugned order. He makes a statement that Applicant/Appellant is ready and willing to deposit amount as directed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum alongwith interest, compensation, costs, etc. He submits that four weeks time may be granted to deposit the amount. However, he submits that till the disposal of appeal amount may not be disbursed to the Non-Applicant/Respondent. He also submitted that that the deposited amount be invested in a nationalized bank. On these conditions he prays for grant of stay. The statement is accepted. Therefore, it is directed that within a period of four weeks from the date of this order (since the foregoing order is passed in presence of learned counsel for the Applicant/Appellant) Applicant/Appellant shall deposit with the District Forum, the amount as directed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum along with interest, compensation and costs. While depositing amount as per direction of the District Forum, amount which has been deposited at the time of filing of appeal as per proviso to Section-15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 shall be adjusted and the remaining amount be deposited. On deposit of this amount, stay to the impugned order till further orders.
If the amount is not deposited within a period of four weeks, the Non-Applicant/Respondent is at liberty to proceed with the execution of order. Registrar of State Commission is hereby directed to remit the amount, if any deposited by the Applicant/Appellant at the time of filing of the appeal to the District Forum forthwith. Registrar of the District Forum is hereby directed to deposit the amount deposited by the Applicant/Appellant in a Nationalized bank, initially for a period of one year and if within a period of one year appeal is not disposed of, Registrar shall go on depositing the said amount in the Nationalized bank on year to year till disposal of the appeal. Applicant/Appellant shall communicate this order to the District Forum. Non-Applicant/Respondent is hereby at a liberty to file say on the application moved by the Applicant/Appellant seeking grant of stay to the execution of the impugned order.
Pronounced on 13th July, 2015
