Per Mr.S.R.Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member This is an appeal against the dismissal of delay condonation application in filing consumer complaint No.09/2010, Pranali Sanjiv Bhogate V/s. Prakash Govind Apte & Anr., by District Consumer Forum, Raigad. Holding that the delay is not satisfactorily explained, the Forum below was pleased to dismiss the application. Feeling aggrieved thereby, this appeal is filed by the appellant/org. complainant. Admit and heard forthwith with consent of both the parties. Delay is explained by the applicant in the second para of her application pointing out that due to their extremely good relation with the opposite party/builder, the complainant who is a lady was under impression that her grievance would be redressed in respect of unfinished work for which deficiency in service is alleged on the part of the builder. Further, when she realized that time was exhausted and no efforts made to sort out her grievance, she searched for an expert who could examine the defects in her bungalow, but due to court matter, her efforts become futile and therefore, she contacted private engineer Mr.Prasad Patil. However, in obtaining opinion of Shri Prasad Patil it consumed time and thus, cumulative effect of these happenings, ultimately, there is delay of 34 days. Therefore, she filed the consumer complaint along with application for condonation of delay. This application for condonation of delay is vehemently opposed by the builder before the Forum below as is done before us also. However, looking to the totality of the circumstances, what we find is that the delay is satisfactorily explained by the complainant. It cannot be ignored that she is a lady and all the while she hoped that her grievance will be redressed since she had good relations with the builder/developer. But, meeting with the frustration and seeing that time to file consumer complaint is being running out, she tried to collect necessary evidence to substantiate her grievance, so that she can successfully file a consumer complaint. She was not sitting idle as such, but doing efforts to collect said evidence which she had mentioned in her application, supra. Delay is consequential and not intentional and no malafides could be attributed to the complainant. In this background to get redress her grievance, we find that she has satisfactorily explained the delay. Approach of the Forum below is erroneous. We hold that delay being satisfactorily explained, her application ought to have been allowed. Hence, we pass the following order :- -: ORDER :- 1. Appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 29/06/2010 is quashed and set aside. 2. Delay in filing consumer complaint is condoned subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- which shall be paid within 30 days from today to the respondent/org. O.P. 3. Subject to satisfaction of this condition, consumer complaint be entertained with original number by the Forum below and settle the dispute according to the law. 4. Both the parties shall appear before the Forum below on 15/11/2010. 5. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties. | 
