Narayan Singh Rotella – Appellant
Versus
Bell Ceremics Ltd. – Respondent
S.K.M. Lodha, President - There is a bar of limitation in this appeal and as such only those facts will be noticed which are necessary for deciding this question. The District Forum, Ajmer by its order dated 18.7.1990 dismissed the complaint of the complainant-appellant. The appeal was filed on 20.9.1990. An application for the certified copy of the order appealed against was made on 9.8.1990. The certified copy was delivered on 17.8.1990. Time requisite in obtaining the certified copy is nine days. Period prescribed for filing the appeal is thirty days. The appeal was filed 64 days after the pronouncement of the order. Thus, it has been presented 25 days after expiry of the period of limitation. Office reported that the appeal is barred by limitation. With the memo of appeal an application for condonation of delay was submitted. It was accomplained by an affidavit of the complainant appellant. The affidavit bears the date 14.9.1990. It was sworn on 17.9.1990. It is to be seen whether the complainant-appellant has succeeded in making out a sufficient cause for the belated presentation of the appeal. S. 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 provides for appeal. The period
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.