Date : 10.07.2013
Per Mr.S.M.Shembole, Hon`ble Presiding Judicial Member.
1. This is an application for condonation of delay of 70 days which was caused in preferring appeal against the judgment and order dated 28.5.2012 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Latur in C.C.No. 249/2010.
2. We heard learned counsel for both the sides, perused the application under order, and copy of impugned judgment and order. We also perused the copy of medical certificate.
3. It is submitted by Shri.S.P.Urgunde learned counsel for the appellant that applicant could not file appeal in time as she was ailing. According to him appellant was ailing due to back ache and therefore she was advised by Dr.Gaikwad for rest for the period of 20.6.2012 to 5.8.2012. Further it is submitted that applicant was also out of station after 5.8.2012 and therefore he could not file appeal immediately after 5.8.2012.
4. Further it is submitted that there is legal point involved in this appeal. Therefore it is just and proper to condone the delay. Accordingly, he has submitted to condone the delay.
5. Per contra, Shri.Sunil Thite learned counsel for non-applicant submitted that there is no just and reasonable ground to condone such inordinate delay of more than 70 days. He has denied the medical certificate. According to him applicant was not ailing but he was obtained false medical certificate just to support the application. The appellant has filed this appeal along with application for condonation of delay with malafide intention to prolong execution of impugned judgment and order. It is submitted to dismiss the application.
6. On perusal of copy of medical certificate it creates doubt as to whether it is genuine certificate or not because except this certificate there is no medical case papers. Though it is shown in the medical certificate that appellant was suffering from back ache, no prescription chit if any given by the doctor is produced on record. Even if it is presumed that applicant was suffering from back ache it cannot be expected that he was required to take bed rest continuously for the period 20.7.2012 to 5.8.2012. In our view though the applicant was having any back ache he could have contacted his counsel for giving instruction to file appeal. Therefore ground of ailing cannot be considered for condonation of delay.
7. Moreover, it is obvious from the record that appeal period was already over on or before 3.7.2012 but no reasons are given by the applicant as to why he has not filed the appeal immediately after 3.7.2012, even though he was required to take rest as per advise of Dr.Gaikwad from 20.7.2012. Therefore in the absence of any explanation about non-filing of appeal during period from3.7.2012 to 20.7.2012 application under order cannot be considered.
8. Apart from apropos facts though it is merely mentioned in the application that after 5.8.2012 applicant was out of station, he could have been filed the appeal before leaving Latur for his business school. Thus on any count we find no just and reasonable ground to condone such inordinate delay of 70 days or more. If such inordinate delay is condoned in the absence of any proper explanation the very object of legislation would be defeated. Hence we are declined to condone the delay and pass the following order.
O R D E R
1. Misc.application for condonation of delay is dismissed.
2. Consequently, appeal is dismissed.
3. No order as to cost.
4. Copies of the judgment and order be supplied to both the parties.
Pronounced and dictated in
the open court on dt. 10.07.2013.
