Petitioner was the opposite party before the District Forum.

       Deceased Ajit Singh was working as bus driver since 1998.  On the night of 10.12.2001, he died due to electrocution as he came into contact with a stray wire of an electric pole when he was watering his

-2-

wheat crop.  Alleging that the accident had taken place due to the negligence of the petitioner, the complaint was filed before the District Forum.

       District Forum vide its order dated 18.6.2003 allowed the complaint and directed the petitioner to pay Rs.2,40,000/- by way of compensation along with interest @ 10% p.a. from 12.09.2002 till realization.

       Petitioner being aggrieved filed the appeal before the State Commission without depositing the requisite amount in terms of provisions of Second proviso to Section 15 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The appeal was filed on 05.09.2003.

          Provisions of Second proviso to Section 15, which were introduced by amending Act No.62 of 2002, came into force w.e.f. 15.3.2003, read as under:

“ Provided further that no appeal by a person, who is required to pay any amount in terms of order of the District Consumer Forum shall be entertained by the State Commission unless the appellant has deposited in the prescribed manner fifty percent of that amount or twenty five thousand rupees, whichever is less”

       A perusal of the aforesaid provision indicates that the requirement of pre-deposit is a condition precedent for entertaining of the appeal.  The compliance of the aforesaid provision is mandatory in nature and not optional.  It is specified in clear terms that that no appeal by a person, who is required to pay any amount in terms of order of the District Consumer Forum shall be ENTERTAINED by the State Commission unless the appellant deposits the amount in the prescribed manner. 

       On 19.1.2004, the State Commission had given an opportunity to the petitioner to deposit the amount as required under the Amended Act.  Inspite of the time given, the petitioner did not comply with the provisions of second proviso to Section 15 of the Act.  Petitioner did not avail of the opportunity and deposit the amount.  No explanation for non compliance was furnished.  The State Commission, taking into consideration the fact that the appeal had been filed without complying with the mandatory condition of second proviso to Section 15 and also that the petitioner had failed to deposit the amount inspite of opportunity given to it to do so, dismissed the appeal relying upon a judgment of this Commission.  Petitioner being aggrieved has filed the present revision petition.

-4-

          We agree with the view taken by the State Commission.  It is not disputed before us that the petitioner did not make the deposit in terms of requirement of second proviso to Section 15.  The question which falls for consideration is - as to what is the effect of non-compliance of the second proviso to Section 15? Second proviso to Section 15 provides that no Appeal, filed by a person, who is required to pay the amount in terms of the Order of the District Forum, shall be entertained by the State Commission unless the appellant has deposited, in the prescribed manner, fifty percent of the amount awarded by the District Forum or twenty five thousand rupees, whichever is less. The word ‘entertained’ was interpreted by Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India in Shyam Kishore and others Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and another reported in AIR 1992 (SC) 2279, to mean: -

“to deal with or attempt to consideration”

Meaning thereby that deposit was a pre-condition for entertaining or admitting the Appeal. In Shyam Kishore’s case (supra), it was observed as under: -

-5-

“In M/s Lakshmiratan Engineering Works Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) I, Sales Tax, Kanpur Range, Kanpur AIR 1968 SC 488 the Supreme Court had occasion to construe the meaning of the word ‘entertained’ in proviso to S.9 of the UP Sales Tax Act, 1948 and the Court took the view that the word ‘ entertain’ means ‘admit to consideration’. The Supreme Court while interpreting the word ‘entertained’ continued in S.9 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 and the proviso thereto made a distinction between the expressions ‘appeal’ and ‘memorandum of appeal’. S.9 contemplated that the appeal could not be entertained without the proof being given along with memorandum of appeal that the tax had been paid. While dealing with the meaning of the word ‘entertained’ Hidayatullah, J. in paragraphs 7 and 10 of the judgment at pages 491 and 493 observed as under:

“(7) To begin with it must be noticed that the proviso merely requires that the appeal shall not be entertained unless it is accompanied by satisfactory proof of the payment of the amount of tax admitted by the appellant to be

-6-

due. A question, thus, arises what is the meaning of the word ‘entertained’ in this context? Does it mean that no appeal shall be received or filed or does it mean that no appeal shall be admitted or heard and disposed of unless satisfactory proof is available? The dictionary meaning of the word ‘entertain’ was brought to our notice by the parties and both sides agreed that it means either ‘to deal with or admit to consideration’. We are also of the same opinion. The question, therefore, is at what stage can the appeal be said to be entertained for the purpose of the application of the proviso? Is it ‘entertained’ when it is filed or is it ‘entertained’ when it is admitted and the date is fixed for hearing or is it finally ‘entertained’ when it is heard and disposed of? Numerous cases exist in the law reports in which the word ‘entertained’ or similar cognate expressions have been interpreted by the Courts. Some of them from the Allahabad High Court itself have been brought to our notice and we shall deal with them in due course. For the present, we must say that if the legislature intended that the word ‘file or

-7-

receive’ was to be used, there was no difficulty in using those words. In some of the statutes which were brought to our notice such expressions have in fact been used…..”

“(10) …..When the proviso speaks of the entertainment of the appeal, it means that the appeal such as was filed will not admitted to consideration unless there is satisfactory proof available of the making of the deposit of admitted tax.”

[Emphasis supplied]

       In the present case, the appeal had been filed after coming into force the second proviso to Section 15 of the
Act and the same could not be entertained or admitted to hearing without deposit of either the fifty percent of the amount awarded by the District Forum or twenty five thousand rupees, whichever is less.  It is also not disputed that inspite of time given by the State Commission, petitioner did not comply with the provision of second proviso to Section 15.

       A similar matter had come up for consideration before this Commission in revision petition “1278 of 2006 titled as National Insurance Company Limited vs. M/s M.R.N. Spinner (P) Ltd.” 

-8-

This Commission relying upon several decisions of this Commission and the Supreme Court dismissed the revision petition holding that the Second proviso to Section 15 was mandatory in nature and non-compliance with the aforesaid provision was fatal.

            Against the aforesaid judgment, the insurance company filed the civil appeal before the Supreme Court.  Supreme Court by a detailed order has upheld the order passed by this Commission (for reference see Civil Appeal No.15238/2011 dated 10.1.2011).  Dismissed.