25.10.2024

ORDER ON ADMISSION

SMT. SUNITA .C. BAGEWADI, MEMBER

The appellant/complainant has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the Order dt.10.08.2022 passed in CC.No.30/2020 on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chamarajanagar.

2.             Heard advocate for appellant on admission.  The office has pointed out that there is a delay of 686 days in preferring the appeal.  On perusal it is noticed that the appellant herein has filed an application to condone the delay along with some documents and sworn affidavit that the delay is primarily attributable to the dire financial condition of the company.  The company has faced significant financial challenges, exacerbated by market conditions and other economic factors.  In particular, the company has been striving to arrange the requisite funds to comply with the mandatory deposit requirement u/s 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which stipulates that no appeal shall be entertained by the State Commission unless the appellant has deposited 50% of the ordered amount.  The effort to gather this substantial sum has been both time-consuming and financially strenuous, contributing to the delay in filing the appeal.  Additionally, the company is based in Telangana, while its legal representative is located in Bangalore.  This significant distance has posed logistical challenges, making it difficult for the appellant to promptly obtain legal advice and coordinate effectively with their legal counsel.  These combined financial and logistical difficulties have unavoidably delayed the filing of the appeal.

3.             It is noticed that the appellant has not deposited the 50% of the statutory amount as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.  If at all the appellant decides to prefer an appeal, he shall file an appeal within 45 days as contemplated in the Consumer Protection Act.  Hence, the delay is fatal to the appeal. 

4.             In view of the decision rendered by the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission reported in 2018(2) CPR 507 (NC) the matter between M/s TDI Infrastructure Ltd., v/s Kulvinder Singh Bahl, the appeal can be dismissed on the point of delay alone.  Accordingly, the appeal deserves to be dismissed on the point of enormous delay. Hence, the following:-

ORDER

The appeal is dismissed.No order as to costs.

Send a copy of this order to both parties as well as Concerned District Commission.

                  Sd/-                                                      Sd/-

(Sunita .C. Bagewadi)                                    (Ravishankar)       

            Member                                              Judicial Member

KCS*