16.03.16

Heard learned counsel for the appellant on admission.

This is delay condonation application filed by the appellant to condone the delay in filing the appeal.

There is a delay of 132’ days in filing the appeal.  The delay in filing the appeal has been explained in the affidavit accompanying the delay condonation application.

Though the delay in filing the appeal has not been satisfactorily explained, but with a view to afford an opportunity to the appellant to plead his case on merit and also in the interest of justice, we allow the delay condonation application and condone the delay in filing the appeal.

This appeal is directed against the order dated 29.09.2015 passed by the District Forum, Dehradun in execution application No. 24 of 2015, whereby the District Forum has directed the appellant – applicant to receive the vehicle from the respondent – opposite party within a period of three days’, failing which the respondent – opposite party shall be entitled to claim garage charges.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has contended that the vehicle has not been repaired as yet.  The District Forum, on the basis of the certificate of the authorised Engineer, has given a categorical finding that as per the direction of the District Forum, the chassis of the vehicle has been replaced and the vehicle has been repaired.  In reply to the said certificate, no evidence was adduced by the appellant.  The appellant wants a new vehicle.  The District Forum was satisfied with the work carried out in the vehicle by the respondent and has decided the execution application in full satisfaction.  It is important to mention here that the District Forum vide order dated 08.04.2015, thereby deciding the consumer complaint No. 218 of 2012, has only directed the respondent to replace the defective parts of the vehicle free of cost and not to claim any garage charges from the appellant.  Therefore, we find no error in the impugned order passed by the District Forum.  The appeal lacks merit and is hereby dismissed.  The appellant is directed to receive the vehicle from the respondent within a period of one week from today and it is provided that in such an event, the respondent shall not claim any garage charges from the appellant.