Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member
There is alleged delay of about 221 days and therefore, Misc. application No.172/2010 for condonation of delay in filing appeal is filed. As per certified copy of impugned order dated 18/07/2009, it was dispatched on the same day to the appellant/org. O.P. and which ought to have been received in the normal course since there is no dispute about the correctness of the address mentioned. Therefore, assuming that said communication has been received within 2-3 days, delay is more than 221 days.
This application for condonation of delay is vehemently opposed by the opponent/org. complainant. According to them, besides Forum below dispatching the copy of impugned order on the same day, they themselves had also communicated the impugned order to the appellant/org. O.P. by their communication through Advocate dated 02/08/2009 which was sent by Courier on 04/08/2009. Thereafter, again on 10/12/2009 on obtaining the Recovery Certificate in Execution Application No.57/2009, the fact was communicated to the Insurance Company. They also produced on record notice of execution sent to the appellant on 22/09/2009. After the Recovery Certificate was issued, when the Enforcement Official went to the appellant/org. O.P. on 10/03/2010, according to the applicant/appellant, for the first time it came to know about the impugned order. In the background of the circumstances narrated earlier, their such statement appears to be not convincing at all. The material fact as to when in normal course, copy of the impugned order dispatched by the Forum below was received, is suppressed from the Commission. Furthermore, besides there were other communications from the org. complainant about development including passing of the impugned order to which reference is made earlier. Thus, we find that the reasons mentioned in the application are not at all convincing, nay, they offer no sufficient ground to condone the delay. We hold accordingly and passed the following order :-
-: ORDER :-
1. Misc. Application No.172/2010 for condonation of delay stands rejected and consequently, Appeal No.338/2010 is not entertained.
2. No order as to costs.
3. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.
