State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Sanjay Namdeorao Thelkar vs Bank Of Maharashtra +1 on 13 March, 2013
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA
STATE CONSUMER
DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA
CIRCUIT BENCH
AT NAGPUR
5 TH FLOOR,
ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING NO. 1
CIVIL LINES,
NAGPUR-440 001
First Appeal
No. A/10/750
(Arisen out of
Order Dated 18/09/2010in Case No. CC/84/10 of District Amravati)
SANJAY NAMDEORAO THELKAR
SHIRAJGOAN KASBA, TAH- CHANDURBAZAR,
AMARAVATI.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. REGIONAL
MANAGER,
BANK OF MAHARASHTRA
LAHANIJINAGAR, AMARAVATI,
TQ. & DISTT. AMARAVATI.
2. BRANCH MANAGER,
BANK OF MAHARASHTRA,
BRANCH SHIRANGJAON KASBA ,
CHANDURBAZAR,
AMARAVATI. ...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
Hon'ble Mr.S.M. Shembole PRESIDING MEMBER
HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR.N. ARUMUGAM MEMBER
PRESENT:
Adv. Smt. Sonar
......for the Appellant
Proxy Adv. Mr. Niraj Patil for Adv. Mr. Rajurkar for
the respondent No.1&2
......for the Respondent
ORDER
(Delivered on 13/03/2013) Below Misc. Application for Delay Condonation Application Per Mr S M Shembole, Hon'ble Presiding Member
1. This is an application for condonation of delay of 47 days, which was caused in preferring the appeal against the judgment & order dated 18/09/2010 passed by District Consumer Forum, Amravati in consumer complaint No. CC/10/84.
2. We heard Smt. Sonar, Ld. Counsel for the appellant/applicant and Proxy Adv. Mr. Patil appearing for the respondent No. 1&2 and perused the application under order and the copy of impugned judgment & order.
3. It is submitted by Smt. Sonar, Ld. Counsel for the applicant / appellant that there was delay as appellant/applicant was ailing and was advised rest for 47 days by Dr. R.W. Sonar. She has also produced the Medical certificate dated 26/11/2010 issued by Dr. R.W. Sonar, she has further submitted that there was not with any mala fide intention to prolong the execution of the impugned order but due to his illness he could not file the appeal. It is submitted to condone the delay.
4. Per contra, Mr. Patil, Proxy Adv. for Adv. Mr. Rajurkar for the non-applicants/respondents submitted that there is no just & reasonable ground to condone such inordinate delay of 47 days. He has disputed the medical certificate and submitted that this certificate is false, as it does not reflect the exact B.P. of the appellant, etc.
5. On perusal of medical certificate we find much force in the submission of Proxy Adv. Mr. Patil for the respondents. Because this certificate merely reflects that the appellant was suffering from enteric fever and high B.P., but in our view enteric fever could not be remained for 40 days. Further, the medical certificate does not reflect the B.P. level, etc. Moreover, this certificate reflects that the appellant was advised rest for 40 days. It does not reflect that the appellant was advised for bed rest and he was admitted anywhere for that period. Even if it is so, there could be no difficulty for the appellant/applicant to engage counsel and file the appeal in time. Thus, on any count, we find no reasonable ground to condone inordinate delay of 47 days. Hence, we are declined to condone the delay and pass the following order.
ORDER i.
Misc. Application for condonation of delay stands dismissed.
ii.
Consequently, the appeal bearing No.A/10/750 is rejected.
iii.
No order as to cost.
Dated:- 13/03/2013 [ Hon'ble Mr.S.M. Shembole] PRESIDING MEMBER [ HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL] MEMBER [ HON'BLE MR.N. ARUMUGAM] MEMBER ay