This revision petition has been filed with a delay of 323 days, which is over and above the statutory period of 90 days given for filing the revision petition.  Consumer fora are required to decide the cases in a summary manner within given time frame.  Complaint has to be disposed of within 90 days from the date of filing where no expert evidence is required to be taken and within 150 days where expert evidence is required to be taken.  The inordinate delay of 323 days cannot be condoned without sufficient cause being shown.  The only

-2-

cause shown for the delay is that the petitioner is an old man and due to ill health he has not been in a position to undertake the travel or to contact his counsel because of which the revision petition could not be filed within time.  The delay of each day has to be explained which the petitioner has failed to do.  He has not mentioned his age or the type of disease from which he is suffering from.  We are not satisfied with the cause shown for condonation of delay.  Application seeking condonation of delay is dismissed. 

Otherwise also, the State Commission has non-suited the petitioner on the ground that the complaint filed by him was time barred as it had been filed after two years of the arising of the cause of action.  The State Commission has also dismissed the appeal on the ground that the District Forum at Panchkula did not have the territorial jurisdiction.

We agree with the view taken by the State Commission on both the points.  Cause of action had arisen to the petitioner on 7/8.5.2005 whereas the complaint was filed on 22.08.2007, i.e., after expiry of two years three months and 15 days.  Under Section 24 A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 complaint can be filed within two years of arising of the cause of action.  No application for condonation of delay was filed.  The cause of action had arisen at Narwana District Jind whereas the complaint was filed at Panchkula where neither the cause of action nor part of the cause of action had arisen.  The State Commission on both the points has relied upon the judgments of Supreme Court which are binding on us as well.

Revision petition is dismissed on the ground of delay as well as on merits.