No. 5/25.11.2010.

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI PRABIR KUMAR SAMANTA, PRESIDENT.

Appellant through Mr. Amitava Biswas, the Ld. Advocate and Respondents through Mr.Chanchal Dutta, the Ld. Advocate are present.  Respondents file objection against petition for condonation of delay.

This is an application for condonation of delay in filing this appeal.  The appeal has been filed out of time by about 300 days.  In the above application it has been stated as under :

“3.     That the said C.C. Case being no. 79/2008 was heard by both the parties and finally disposed of on 29.07.2009 and the case was dismissed on content without cost.

4.       That the Appellant / petitioner came to know about the result of the said C.C. Case and came to learn that the said C.C. Case and came to learn that the said C.C. Case was dismissed with contest.

5.       That the Appellant/ complainant filed a petition for certified copy of the judgement of C. C. Case on 11.8.2009 and the Appellant/ complainant took the said certified copy on 28.8.09.

6.       That on 29.8.2009 the Appellant / complainant was affected by chronic Hepatities and chronic Pan Creatitis and was bed-ridden from 30.08.09 to 29.06.10.  As such, the delay in filing the appeal is quite unintentional, he would have filed the appeal within the prescribed time if he did not affected in acute jaundice.

7.       That the Appellant/ complainant have got no intentional latches or negligence in the matter of proceeding with the appeal.  As such, the delay in filing the instant appeal is recorded to be condoned otherwise the Appellant/ complainant will suffer irreparable loss which cannot be compensated by money value”.

Upon reading of the above averments we do not find sufficient materials to hold that the Appellant – Petitioner was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the above appeal within the prescribed period of limitation because the impugned order was passed on 29.07.2009 upon contest by the parties.  It has not been disclosed as to why the disposal of the said case on 29.07.2009 was not known to the Complainant.  This application has been filed through Sri Makhan Lal Das as being the Secretary of the Appellant.   It has not been proved on the materials on record that one Sri Makhan Lal Das, was the secretary of the Complainant at the relevant point of time and was entrusted to file this appeal before this Commission.  For the reasons as aforesaid, the application for condonation of delay is dismissed.  The appeal be treated as dismissed being barred by limitation.