Order No. 4 date: 08-04-2019

Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member

Record is put up today for passing order in respect of the delay condonation petition of the Appellant.

By such petition, it is submitted by the Appellant that after passing of the impugned order, Appellant could not apply for the certified copy of the same as he was out of country for business purpose.  Therefore, he could contact his Ld. Advocate only in the month of September, 2018.  Ultimately, the Appeal was filed on 27-09-2018.

Both sides were heard through their respective Ld. Advocates and documents on record gone through.

It is though contended by the Appellant that owing to his business assignment abroad, he could not maintain proper liaison with his Ld. Advocate, no documentary proof is furnished to substantiate such fact. In absence of cogent documentary proof to substantiate the claim of the Appellant, we afraid, no relief can be granted to the Appellant.

Further, it appears that the instant complaint case was filed in the year 2012 and despite due service of notice upon the Appellant, no effort whatsoever was made from the end of the Appellant to defend his case before the Ld. District Forum.  Therefore, final order in the matter was passed by the Ld. District Forum on 26-03-2013.

Subsequently, the execution case was filed in the year 2013 and as before, due service of notice upon the Appellant was scrupulously made in this case too.  However, though the matter hanged in the balance for long 5 long years, the Appellant did not bother to appear before the Ld. District Forum even once. 

Ultimately, when WA was issued upon the Appellant, good sense prevailed upon him and he woke up from his deep slumber. 

The conduct of the Appellant is not at all commendable. Although the award passed by the Ld. District Forum attained finality way back in the year 2013, till date justice has not been done to the Respondent.  On perusal of the Memo of Appeal, we have not come across any valid reason to set aside the impugned order. In other words, there is no merit in this Appeal.

Considering all aspects, therefore, we reject the delay condonation petition.  As a result, the Appeal stands dismissed being barred by limitation.