Heard Mr. P. Das, learned counsel, appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr. T. Kalita, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent No. 1 and Mr. R.K. Jain, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2.

        This is an application for condoning the delay of 1539 days in preferring the accompanying appeal. We have perused the statements made in the application filed by the applicant for condoing the delay as well as the objection filed by the respondent. The grounds of delay have been shown at paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 of the application. To see as to whether sufficient causes have been shown for condoning the delay,

statements made in those paragraphs are quoted herein below;-

“3.     That, the petitioner states that after conclusion of evidence of both sides and filing of written argument by both parties, on 16-07-2008 the learned District Forum fixed the aforesaid C.P.C. No. 64/2004 on 30-08-2008 for judgment. On 30-08-2008, the judgment could not be ready and the next date was fixed on 29-09-2008 for judgment but on 29-09-2008 too, neither judgment was pronounced by the learned District Forum in the aforesaid case nor next date was fixed in the said case and thereafter on 19-08-2010 i.e. after gap of nearly 2 years, the learned District Forum all of a sudden had pronounced the judgment in the case.

4.        That the petitioner states that they are not aware of passing of the aforesaid judgment till 03-12-2014, as neither the copy of the said judgment was furnished to the petitioner even after

passing of the aforesaid judgment either by the learned District Forum or his previously engaged counsel, neither his previously engaged counsel able to furnish any dates after 29-09-2008, even several times visited the office of the learned District Forum but he was not able to get any information about the dates after 29-09-2008 and or passing of the judgment in the aforesaid case.

Copy of the entire order sheet of CPC No. 56/2004 is filed herewith as Annexure-1 series.

5.        That the petitioner states that impugned order and judgment dated 19-08-2010 was passed by the learned District Forum in the aforesaid case, dismissing the consumer complaint of the appellant and even after passing of the aforesaid judgment and order, the records were not available for inspection to the petitioner and finding no other alternative the petitioner was planning to submit his complaint in the matter and before that the petitioner had applied certified copy of all orders, judgments, if any and cross examination of the witnesses on 30-10-2014  through another advocate namely Mr. Piyus Jain, but that even they unable to get the copy of the same till 02/12/204 and on 03-12-2014, the said Advocate informed the petitioner that judgment was already pronounced in the aforesaid case on 19-08-2010, dismissing their complaint, without any date in between 30-08-2008 to 19-08-2010. The petitioner was surprised and astonished to hear the aforesaid facts and after getting the aforesaid certified copy, all orders and judgment, the petitioner visited Mr. H.L. Maurya, Advocate on 04-12-2014 to seek legal advice in the matter but due to his engagement in other matters, learned Advocate Mr. H.L. Maurya unable to go through the case of the petitioner and asked him to come on 20-12-2014 and on 20-12-

2014 after verifying all documents, order sheet, judgment etc., he informed the petitioner that they have a good case to go for appeal and every chances to succeed in the case and informed the petitioner to get his Memo of Appeal and Application for condoning the delay in filing of Appeal through some other Advocate, as he is unable to appear in the appellant forum due to his personal reason. Thereafter, the petitioner contacted the present counsel on 21-12-2014 and asked him to prepare Memo of Appeal with necessary application for condoning the delay in filing of appeal. The present counsel took some time to get the Memo of Appeal and necessary Application for condoning the delay in filing the Appeal and it was finally ready on 28-12-2014 (Sunday) and as such the same is filed today along with this application, before this Hon’ble Commission.”

        Upon perusal of the statements made on oath at paragraphs 3, 4, and 5 above along with Annexure-1, we have found sufficient causes have been shown by the applicant for not preferring the appeal in time. Thus, considering the statements made on oath at paragraphs 3,4 and 5 of the application along with Annexure-1 and, also for the ends of justice, delay in preferring the accompanying appeal is condoned subject to payment of Rs. 5000/- as cost.

        The cost of Rs. 5000/- shall be deposited before the Registry within fifteen days from today. The Registry shall pay the amount to the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 on proper identification and the same amount shall be divided equally between respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

        Misc Case is allowed and disposed of accordingly.