M/s Jaidev Infra tech Pvt. Ltd. through its director Mr. Ashok Kumar  

……………………………………….Petitioner/OP 

V/s

Qamar Ahmmad ……………………….OP/Complainant   

In the Matter of:-

Complaint Case No.    146 /2022

Qamar Ahmmad ……………………….Complainant   

V/s

M/s Jaidev Infra tech Pvt. Ltd. through its director Mr. Ashok Kumar  

Date :              .2024

Order

1. Petitioner/Op has moved review petition U/s -40 Consumer Protection Act-2019 with the application U/s -5 Limitation Act and Article -68 and 91(a) for codonation of delay in filing the review petition.
2. Petitioner has assailed the judgment and order dated 28.10.2023 passed by this commission in the complaint case no.146 of 2022 and has prayed for setting aside the order dated 28.10.2023 and to stay the execution proceeding after condonation of delay in filing the review petition.
3. Petitioner has stated that the complant was proceeded exparte on 07.9.2022 on the basis of application and screenshot of whatsApp chat filed by him. He came to know in the month of June 2024 about the execution proceedings wherein warrant was issued. Petitioner appeared and he was released on bail on 06.06.2024. Delay occurred due to a delay in gaming knowledge about pendency and disposal of case which he came to know in the month June 2024.
4. Petitioner has challenged judgment and order dated 28.10.2023 mainly on the grounds of service of notice on him and lack of appreciation of principals of equity and natural justice in passing the impugned judgment and awarding the refund of the amount deposited and also payment of the amount at presumed rent of Rs.25000/ per month.
5. Petitioner has supported the review petition and application for condonation of delay with affidavits.
6. We have heard the counsel for petitioner and perused the record.
7. It is evident that the petitioner has sought the condonation of delay stating the date of knowledge of the case on 07.09.2022 on the basis of whats App chat and application and thereafter on issuing the warrant in execution proceedings which he came to know in the month of June2024.
8. It appears from perusal of record that the petitioner was served with the notice on 03.08.2022 by registered post as is evident from track consignment status issued by the Post Office and thereafter he had also moved application with screen shot whatts App chat on 07.09.2022 and thus he had sufficient knowledge of the case on 03.08.2022 and thereafter on 07.09.2022. Petitioner has not stated any fact whereby he was prevented appearing in the court to contest the case. Petitioner has not stated sufficient cause whereby he could not appear in the Commission to contest the case after 07.09.2022. There is no sufficient grounds  for condonation of delay in moving the application U/s 5 limitation Act and application U/s -5 limitation Act is liable to be rejected.
9. So far as the review petition is concerne, petitioner has sated for setting aside the exparte order on the ground of service of notice. Petitioner was served with the notice on 03.08.2022 by registered post and he had also moved application with screen shot whats App on 07.09.2022 but no WS was filed. There is no provision for setting aside the exparte order in Consumer Protection Act,2019 and the provisions of CPC mentioned in section 38(9) of the Consumer Protection Act,2019 do not contain the provision for setting aside the exparte order. Further, the grounds of setting aside the exparte can be the ground for filing the review petition U/s 40. The review petition is not maintainable on the grounds of setting aside the exparte order.
10. The petitioner except the ground of setting aside the exparte order, has not stated any grounds of apparent error appearing on the face of the record as a ground of review petition and there is no grounds in review petition as mentioned U/s-40 of the Consumer protection Act,2019 for entertaining the review petition.
11. Petitioner has challenged the relief granted to the complainant for refund of the amount and payment on the basis of monthly rent which are not covered U/s -40 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 to show apparent error on the face of the record and those may be the grounds on merits which can be considered in appeal and not in review petition.
12. In view of discussion made above, review petition is not only time barred but it is also beyond the scope of section -40 of the Consumer ProtectionAct, 2019 and is not legally maintainable.

We hereby dismiss the application under section 5 Limitation Act and review Petition. Let it be registered as misc. case and be consigned to record room.