Sh. R.K. Tyagi, Advocate is present on behalf of the appellant.

Heard on delay condonation application.

This is delay condonation application filed by the appellant to condone the delay in filing the appeal.  The delay in filing the appeal has been explained by the appellant in the delay condonation application supported with affidavit.

We are satisfied with the reasons shown by the appellant for delay in filing the appeal.  Therefore, the delay condonation application is allowed and the delay of 5 days’ in filing the appeal is condoned.

Heard on admission.

This appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is directed against the order dated 11.07.2018 passed by the District Forum, Chamoli in consumer complaint No. 23 of 2017.  By the order impugned, the District Forum has rejected the application moved by the appellant – complainant under Section 24A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for condonation of delay in filing the consumer complaint.

In the delay condonation application, it was stated that the complainant suffered loss in the natural calamity which took place on 16/17.06.2013.  There is bank loan upon the complainant, which he has to repay.  Since June, 2017, the complainant remained busy in his business activities and, as such, could not file the consumer complaint within time.

In the consumer complaint, it has been stated that the insurance company has repudiated the claim of the complainant through letter dated 04.08.2015.  As such, the consumer complaint should have been filed within a period of two years’ from the date of repudiation of the claim.  Admittedly, there was delay of 93 days’ in filing the consumer complaint, for which no sufficient cause or reason was shown by the complainant.  The mere fact that the complainant remained busy in his business activities, can not be said to be a sufficient ground for condonation of delay in filing the consumer complaint.

In the case of Swiss International Air Lines Ltd. Vs. Jitender Mohan Bhasin and others; III (2012) CPJ 583 (NC), there was delay of 244 days’ in filing the revision petition.  It was held by the Hon’ble National Commission that the petitioner has failed to offer convincing rationale of reasons in support of his application.  It was also held that there was gross negligence, deliberate inaction and lack of bonafides are imputable to the petitioner and the delay was not condoned.  The Hon’ble National Commission in the case of Jain International Sansthan Vs. Krish City, Bhiwadi and others; III (2016) CPJ 2 (NC), has declined to condone the delay of 168 days’ in filing the revision petition and has held that no lucid excuse is forthcoming from the petitioner to justify the delay in filing the revision petition.  It was held that the case is barred by time.  In the said decision, reliance was placed upon the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court given in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 37183 of 2013; Sanjay Sidgonda Patil Vs. Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limited and another, decided on 17.12.2013, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has confirmed the order of the Hon’ble National Commission and refused to condone the delay of 13 days’.

We do not find any infirmity in the impugned order passed by the District Forum and the District Forum has rightly rejected the delay condonation application.  The appeal lacks merit and is hereby dismissed in limine.