KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

I.A. No. 927/2019 in APPEAL No. 320/2019

ORDER DATED: 16.10.2023

(Against the Order in C.C. 136/2016 of CDRC, Pathanamthitta)

PRESENT:

SRI. AJITH KUMAR D.                                                    : JUDICIAL MEMBER

SRI. RADHAKRISHNAN K.R.                                        : MEMBER

PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS:

1. Rajeev K.N., S/o Narayanan, Executive Director, Sigs Tech Marketing (Sigs Financial Services India Pvt. Ltd., Kulangara House, Thirunakkara P.O., Kottayam-686 601) now residing at Sauparnika, Near to Govt. Guest House, Vikom Road, Trippunithura, Ernakulam.

2. Sandhya K.V., W/o Rajeev K.N., Executive Director, Sigs Tech Marketing (Sigs Financial Services India Pvt. Ltd., residing at Sauparnika, Near to Govt. Guest House, Vikom Road, Trippunithura, Ernakulam.

(By Adv. Sreekala S.)

                                                Vs.

RESPONDENTS:

1. T.C. Cherian, S/o T.M. Cherian, Thanagalathil House, Kadamankulam P.O., Kallooppara Village, Mallappally Taluk, Pathanamthitta.

(By Adv. Reny Mammen)

2. Vrinda Rajesh, Director, Sigs Tech Marketing, Pulickal Trade Centre, S.H. Mount P.O., Nagampadam, Kottayam-686 001, residing at Kulangara House, Thirunakkara P.O., Kottayam-686 001.

3. George Vazhappally Thomas, Vazhappally House, Vasantha Nagar, Elthuruth P.O., Thrissur-680 611.

ORDER

SRI. RADHAKRISHNAN. K.R.: MEMBER

This is an appeal filed by the 2^nd and 3^rd opposite parties under Sec. 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against the order in C.C. No. 136/2016 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Pathanamthitta (District Commission for short).  The District Commission by its order dated 28.04.2017 allowed the complaint.  The appeal is filed with a delay of 920 days. 

2.  The petitioners seek condonation of a delay of 920 days in filing the appeal.    The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were not aware of the order against them and therefore could not file the appeal in time. They came to know of the order only when they received notice in the execution proceedings.  According to them 2^nd appellant did not receive the notice and the notice received by the first appellant was handed over to the 2^nd respondent/first opposite party as the complaint pertains to their client. They thought that the case will be handled by them and that appellants would have been removed from the party array and hence no further action was taken. The learned counsel for the Petitioners /Appellants submitted that the reasons stated for the delay are genuine and was not deliberate or intentional and hence prayed for condoning the delay.

3.  The learned counsel for the 1^st respondent/complainant filed objections and vehemently opposed the delay condonation petition.  She submitted that the 4^th opposite party in the same complaint had filed an appeal against the same order as Appeal No. 224/2019.  This Commission dismissed the delay condonation petition and the said appeal on 28.01.2020.  According to the learned counsel, the contentions raised for condonation of delay are false and baseless.  The appellants were aware of the case and they were intentionally evading the court.  She submitted that the appellants were well aware of the complaint and about the order of the District Commission and was ignoring and avoiding it intentionally. She further submitted that the reasons stated are not genuine and there is no sufficient or reasonable cause for the delay.  Hence, the learned counsel prayed for dismissal of the delay condonation petition and appeal.

4.  We have heard the learned counsel on both sides and carefully gone through the records.

5.  The delay sought to be condoned is 920 days.  It is admitted that, the order of the District Commission is dated 28.04.2017 and the appeal should have been filed within the prescribed time limit. We are not convinced about the reasons given by the appellants for the delay in filing the appeal.  Needless to say that condonation of delay cannot be claimed as a matter of right. Where there is a delay, the burden is upon the person who appears before the Commission seeking condonation of delay to explain it with sufficient reasons. The appellants appear to have not acted diligently and had remained inactive for quite some time after getting the order of the District Forum.  They have not been able to give adequate and sufficient reasons to show that they were prevented from approaching this Commission within the limitation period, due to circumstances beyond their control.

In view of the foregoing reasons, we find no grounds to condone the inordinate delay of 920 days. The petition for condonation of delay is accordingly dismissed. As a consequence, the appeal is also dismissed in limine being barred by limitation.

AJITH KUMAR D. : JUDICIAL MEMBER

jb                                                                     RADHAKRISHNAN K.R.  : MEMBER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL No. 320/2019

JUDGMENT DATED: 16.10.2023

(Against the Order in C.C. 136/2016 of CDRC, Pathanamthitta)

PRESENT:

SRI. AJITH KUMAR D.                                                   : JUDICIAL MEMBER

SRI. RADHAKRISHNAN K.R.                                        : MEMBER

APPELLANTS:

1. Rajeev K.N., S/o Narayanan, Executive Director, Sigs Tech Marketing (Sigs Financial Services India Pvt. Ltd., Kulangara House, Thirunakkara P.O., Kottayam-686 601) now residing at Sauparnika, Near to Govt. Guest House, Vikom Road, Trippunithura, Ernakulam.

2. Sandhya K.V., W/o Rajeev K.N., Executive Director, Sigs Tech Marketing (Sigs Financial Services India Pvt. Ltd., residing at Sauparnika, Near to Govt. Guest House, Vikom Road, Trippunithura, Ernakulam.

(By Adv. Sreekala S.)

                                                Vs.

RESPONDENTS:

1. T.C. Cherian, S/o T.M. Cherian, Thanagalathil House, Kadamankulam P.O., Kallooppara Village, Mallappally Taluk, Pathanamthitta.

(By Adv. Reny Mammen)

2. Vrinda Rajesh, Director, Sigs Tech Marketing, Pulickal Trade Centre, S.H. Mount P.O., Nagampadam, Kottayam-686 001, residing at Kulangara House, Thirunakkara P.O., Kottayam-686 001.

3. George Vazhappally Thomas, Vazhappally House, Vasantha Nagar, Elthuruth P.O., Thrissur-680 611.

JUDGMENT

SRI. RADHAKRISHNAN. K.R.:  MEMBER

Petition for condonation of delay (I.A. No. 927/2019) is dismissed.  Hence the appeal is also dismissed.

Statutory deposit remitted by the appellants at the time of filing this appeal shall be refunded to them, on proper application.

               AJITH KUMAR D. : JUDICIAL MEMBER

                                                                        RADHAKRISHNAN K.R.  : MEMBER

jb

             .