State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The Oriental Ins Co.Ltd vs Jayeshbhai Khatabhai Makwana on 24 March, 2023
IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
STATE OF GUJARAT
COURT NO.5
MA no. 115 of 2023
APPLICANT: The Oriented Ins. Co. Ltd.
VS
RESPONDENT: Jayeshbhai Makwana
CORUM: Mr. R.N. Mehta, Presiding Member
Appearance: Smt. Dimple Thakar Advocate for Applicant Advocate was appeared for the Respondent (By Mr. R.N. Mehta, Dt.24/03/2023)
1) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order and judgment dated 02/11/2022 of District Commission, Bhavnagar, in Consumer complaint no.CC 907 of 2021 the applicant herein wants to prefer appeal under the provisions of The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (old Act of 1986). However, the appeal is being filed delayed by 58 days and to condone such delay, the applicant herein files this application under Sec. 41 of The C P Act, 2019 ( in old Act, Sec. 15) read with Sec.5 of the Limitation Act.
2) Initially, show cause notice as to why delay should not be condoned was issued to the respondents
3) None appeared thought service of notice for the respondent.
Sanjana MA 115 2023 Page 1 of 34) Heard Smt. Dimple Thakar for applicant. Read application and perused documents placed on record.
5) According to Smt. Dimple Thakar the impugned order was pronounced on 02/11/2022, however, copy thereof was made available to party on 23/11/2022. The appeal was presented on 20/01/2023. Thus there is delay of 58 days.
6) Smt. Dimple Thakar submits that reasons for delay are as under:
a) The advocate for the applicant was supplied with papers in the first week of December, 2022. Thereafter the advocate prepared the draft of appeal nd application for stay. The advocate therefore addressed the company and called for the documents which are required for finalizing the draft and preparation of the matter. The documents were received and then the draft was finalized and was sent for approval to the concerned authority. In the addressed the company and called for the documents which are required for finalizing the draft and preparation of the matter.
The documents were received and then the draft was finalized and was sent for approval to the concerned authority. In the Meantime the period of limitation expired resulting into delay of 58 days in filling the captioned appeal.
7) He submits that there was no intentional delay an appeal has been preferred at the earliest and the applicant has good case on merits. There are all probabilities that applicant may succeed in appeal. If delay is not condoned, it will cause great injustice to the applicant. If delay is condoned, it will not cause any injustice to the present respondents because even in appeal their legitimate right to defend is protected by law.
8) I am the opinion that administrative delay can also be minimized with diligent efforts. When the law prescribed period for filing appeal, the aggrieved party should take up the cause as early as possible. Delay beyond more than Sanjana MA 115 2023 Page 2 of 3 reasonable period, that too, over and above the period prescribed under the law, clearly suggests that applicant have not made sincere efforts to minimize delay. It also can be said that time has been allowed to run carelessly. It is well said that delayed justice is no justice and therefore the other part should not be made to suffer. Just to put a curb on habit of filing of appeals with delay of more than reasonable period it would be just and proper to impose cost on the applicant. It is in these circumstances, I pass following order.
ORDER Misc. Application No. 115 of 2023 is hereby allowed and delay of 58 days in preferring appeal is hereby condoned subject to cost of Rs.1000/- which is to be deposited in Consumer Welfare Fund within four weeks from today.
The office is hereby directed to register appeal and to put it before appropriate bench for admission hearing of appeal on. 18/04/2023.
Pronounced today on this 24th day of March, 2023 Mr. R N Mehta Presiding Member Sanjana MA 115 2023 Page 3 of 3