State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Narayana Iit Academy vs R.K. Sharma on 26 May, 2010
IN THE STATE COMMISSION:DELHI IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI (Constituted under Section 9 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986) Date of Decision: 26.05.2010 First Appeal No.2010/173 (Arising out of Order dated 18.12.2009 passed by the District Consumer Forum(West) Janak Puri, New Delhi in Complaint Case No.1036/2008) Narayana IIT Academy . Appellant /OP 47-B, Kalu Sarai, through Mr. Yash Mishra, New Delhi. advocate Versus Sh. R.K. Sharma, . Respondent/Complainant 223-H, MIG Flats, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi. CORAM Justice Barkat Ali Zaidi ... President Sh. M.L. Sahni Member
1. Whether reporters of local newspapers be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
Sh. M.L. Sahni, Member(Judicial) ORAL
1. The appellant OP is an academy of tuition, which prepares candidates for competitive examinations. The respondent student has left the academy and the District Forum has awarded Rs.63,000/- because the student did not avail services of the Academy.
2. This is an application filed by the appellant for condonation of delay of 17 days involved in filing the appeal against an order dated 18.12.2009 passed by the District Forum
3. We have heard Sh. Yash Mishra, Counsel for the appellant Academy in this appeal.
4. The facts enumerated in the application for condonation of delay indicates shylockish attitude of the appellant Academy. They deserve no sympathy.
5. As to the merits of the question for condonation of delay it will be seen that the ground given by the appellant Academy is that their office is in Hyderabad and therefore it took time for preparing the papers of the appeal and there was as such 17 days delay in filing the appeal. This cannot be considered as justifiable and sufficient ground for condonation of delay in filing the appeal and if such view is taken the other companies having office elsewhere will also claim condonation of delay on this ground.
6. There are as such no sufficient reasons for condonation, and the application for the same is rejected.
7. The application for condonation of delay has been rejected. The appeal is therefore dismissed as time barred.
8. FDR/Bank Guarantee, if any deposited by the appellant be released in favour of the appellant subject to complete of formalities.
9. A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and also to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to Record room.
Announced on 26th day of May 2010.
(Justice Barkat Ali Zaidi) President (M.L. Sahni) Member Tri