Mr. Justice J.K. Mehra, Member—This revision petition arises out of the order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Andhra Pradesh, whereby the State Commission dismissed the appeal of the petitioner herein on the ground of delay. It is not necessary for us to repeat the facts here as the only point to be considered is whether the State Commission was right in dismissing the appeal on the ground of delay.

2. The main plea of the petitioner herein is that it was merely an agency doing the credit rating for various parties on their requests and that they had taken no deposits nor were in any manner responsible for the repayment of any amount which the parties may have deposited with any of the others respondents. In this case, it may be noticed that this petitioner had absented itself from appearing before the District Forum and the matter was decided in its absence. Appeal, which they had filed, suffers from a delay of 332 days. The only plea taken in seeking condonation of delay is that it was not aware of the orders till the petitioner herein was served with the orders in execution. This has been challenged by the respondent. They have pointed out that the petitioner was aware of the orders. They have further referred to the despatch number under which a copy of the order was sent to the petitioners. The State Commission has noticed all these facts and has not felt satisfied about the delay and also about the version of the petitioner that they came to know of the order only on 7.1.2000. We have carefully perused the record and are in agreement with the conclusions reached by the State Commission that the appeal of the petitioner is hopelessly barred by limitation. The delay cannot be condoned except for very good reasons which in the present case are missing. For that reason, the impugned order is upheld and this Revision Petition is dismissed.

Revision Petition dismissed.

–