Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Brief facts of the case are that respondent-complainant purchased vehicle from petitioner on 12.06.2002 for a sum of Rs.6,80,091/- and submitted certificate of taxi and other required documents and claimed refund of excise duty which was denied by the petitioner against which respondent filed complaint and District Forum allowed this complaint and State Commission also upheld the order of the District Forum. This petition has been filed with a delay of 199 days and learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that delay occasioned as counsel for the petitioner came to know about the judgment of the State Commission only on 20.12.2011. Later on applied for the copy and received copy on 26.12.2011 which was misplaced in the office and could be traced only on 05.03.2012 and afterwards this revision petition was filed. Application for condonation of delay has also been supported by the affidavit but certified copy of State Commission order filed with the petition reveals that certified copy was issued on 25.06.2011 and thus there is a delay of 199 days in filing this revision petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner admitted that copy received on 26.12.2011 has not been filed with this revision petition. In these circumstances, it cannot be believed that petitioner came to know about the order of State Commission only on 20.12.2011. There is no explanation about the inordinate delay in filing this revision petition and in such circumstances, the petition is liable to be dismissed only on count of limitation. Looking to inordinate delay, the revision petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed in limine at admission stage. No costs.