Jharkhand

StateCommission

FA/128/2013

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sandeep Kumar Bagaria - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. B. Sinha

03 Dec 2014

ORDER

JHARKHAND STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,RANCHI
FINAL ORDER
 
First Appeal No. FA/128/2013
(Arisen out of Order Dated in Case No. of District State Commission)
 
1. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
Tiwari Enclave, 2nd Floor, Near Lalpur Chowk, P.O. & P.S. - Lalpur, District Ranchi
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Sandeep Kumar Bagaria
Harindanga, Pakur, P.S. Pakur (Town), District Pakur
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. Merathia PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Ajit Kumar MEMBER
 
For the Appellant:
Mr. Bibhash Sinha, Advocate
 
For the Respondent:
Mr. Shashi Kumar Verma, Advocate
 
ORDER

03-12-14 – The reasons for delay in disposal of this appeal can be seen from the ordersheet.

1.       Heard the parties on the prayer for condoning the delay of about 120 days in filing this appeal.

2.       Mr. Bibhash Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that due to official process, there was delay in filing this appeal. He referred to the limitation petition.  He also submitted that there are good chances of success of this appeal.

3.       Mr. S. K. Verma learned counsel appearing for the Respondent seriously contested the said prayer, saying that the long delay has not been properly explained. 

4.       In the limitation petition, it is interalia stated that the counsel of the appellant applied for the free certified copy of the judgment under appeal dated 06.06.2013, which was made available on 17.06.2013. Thereafter the entire file was sent to the concerned branch and from there it was dispatched to the legal cell of the company.  The legal cell, sometimes the 2nd week of July 2013 handed over the file to the lawyer for legal opinion, and on receipt thereof, the file was sent to the higher authority for final decision in the last week of July 2013.  Thereafter, the file was again received by the legal cell in the end of August 2013 and then necessary funds were arranged for preparing the demand draft for filing this appeal.   Then, it is stated that the appellant on getting necessary sanction, got the demand draft prepared on 01.11.2013 then this appeal was filed on 19.11.2013. 

5.       By the said averments the appellant has not been able to explain the long delay properly. At least there is no explanation whatsoever after last week of August 2013 till 01.11.2013.   It is true that liberal approach is taken for condoning the delay, but then the delay has to be properly explained, even, if the party is a public sector company.

          In the present case, as the delay has not been properly explained we are not inclined to condone the long delay of about 120 days in filing this appeal.  Accordingly, the prayer for condoning the delay is rejected.  Consequently, this appeal is dismissed.

          Issue free copy of this order to all concerned for information and needful.

             Ranchi,    

Dated: 03.12.2014

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. Merathia]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. Ajit Kumar]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.