HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ISHAN CHANDRA DAS,PRESIDENT

       This complaint case has been filed by the widow and daughter of deceased Jitendranath Ganguly, a victim of a  road traffic accident, claiming compensation for medical negligence on the part of the OP. The accident took place on 25-02-2014 at about 8 A.M. and the victim died on 16-03-2014. The complaint case was filed before the State Commission claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 25,00,000/- (Rupees twenty five lakh) on 21-02-2018. The complaint case has to be filed within a period of two years from the date on which the cause of action arose i.e. within 15-03-2016 but it was filed after a lapse of 706 days from the allowable period of limitation in terms of section 24A of the Consumer Protection Act. The grounds shown in the petition was that the Advocates appointed  for filing the complaint case, being engaged by the State Legal Aid of the SCDRC, West Bengal was not diligent enough to file the complaint case. Another ground as shown in the petition was that one Advocate drafted the petition of complaint but due to his sudden illness it was not prepared at the appropriate time. The prayer for condonation of delay in filing the complaint case was duly opposed by the OPs no. 1 and 2 who specifically raised objection with regard to the grounds shown in the petition for condonation of delay.

Heard Ld. Counsel for the parties and we have given our anxious thought over the matter. From the averments of the petition of complaint it appears to us that the cause of action of the instant case arose on 16-03-2014 but the instant complaint case was filed after a lapse of 1436 days, claiming reliefs under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act which prescribed a period of two years for filing such application, as we pointed out earlier. Ld. Counsel for the OPs in course of argument drew our attention to a decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ansul Agarwal Vs. New Okhla Industries Development Authority, reported in IV (2011) CPJ 63 (SC) and pointed out that the Hon’ble Apex Court explained the scope of condonation of delay in a matter where the special courts/tribunals have been constituted in order to provide expeditious remedies to the person aggrieved  and Consumer Protection Act 1986 is one of them. It was further observed in Ansul Agarwal (supra) that while dealing with an application for condonation of delay in such a case the court must keep in mind the special period of limitation prescribed under the statute. The statute provides an exception to the rule that the court may condone delay if it is shown that sufficient cause was there for not filing the complaint within the period of limitation. The complainants claimed that they were not properly equipped with the lawyer from the State Legal Aid to assist them in drafting the petition of complaint, for filing it before this Commission and the ground of lawyer’s illness for a specific period cannot be construed as sufficient ground for condoning the delay in filing the petition of complaint rather the complainants filed the instant petition of complaint along with the prayer for condonation of delay to take a chance and the grounds shown in the petition of complaint appear to us were nothing but an alibi which does not convince us at all in dealing with the prayer for condonation of delay favourably. Hence we reject the prayer for condonation of delay and consequently we decline to admit the petition of complaint.