MRIDULA ROY, MEMBER.

No. 5/19.10.2012

This order relates to the petition for condonation of delay filed by the Appellant. 

The instant appeal has been preferred on 09.05.2012 against an order passed on 21.08.2008 by D.C.D.R.F., Kolkata, Unit – I in Complaint Case No. 225/2007.  Admittedly, there is a delay of 1370 days in filing the instant appeal.  Since the appeal is preferred much beyond the stipulated time the Appellant files a petition for condonation of delay.

Section 15 of the C. P. Act provides as under :

“Appeal. – Any person aggrieved by an order made by the District Forum may prefer an appeal against such order to the State Commission within a period of thirty days from the date of the order, in such form and manner as may be prescribed :

Provided that the State Commission may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing it within that period.

Provided further that no appeal by a person, who is required to pay any amount in terms of an order of the District Forum, shall be entertained by the State Commission unless the appellant has deposited in the prescribed manner fifty per cent of that amount of twenty-five thousand rupees, whichever is less;”

In the petition for condonation of delay the Appellant submitted that he had no knowledge about the proceedings of the complaint case.  But the order dated 21.08.2008 in Case No. CC/225/2007 clearly shows that notice had been duly served upon the O.P. (Appellant herein).  Further Order No. 4 dated 11.08.2010 in Execution Case No. 38/2010 filed in connection with CC/225/2007 also shows that S/R was received with postal endorsement “Intimation Served”.  Therefore, the contention made by the Appellant that he had no knowledge about the proceedings has not been substantiated. 

The Appellant has further taken the plea of having been wrongly advised by his lawyer regarding the further course of action to be taken.  But we are unable to accept such plea of the Appellant.

For the aforesaid reasons, we find no sufficient cause for the delay in filing the instant appeal. 

In the result, the petition for condonation of delay does not succeed.  Consequently, the appeal is not admitted.