IMPORTANT POINT
Provisions of Section 47 CPC are not attracted to a proceeding pending before District Consumer Forum.

Bhanwar Singh, President—Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.

2. As both, the appeal and revision arise out of the same dispute subsisting between the parties we take them together for final disposal.

3. Whereas the Appeal No. 381/2010 has been filed against the judgment dated 26.3.2008 of the District Consumer Forum, Unnao passed on the complaint of the respondent filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, the Revision No. 43/2010 has been preferred against rejection order dated 4.2.2010 passed on the revisionist’s application filed under Section 47 C.P.C. and under Section 13(3B) of the Consumer Protection Act. It is noteworthy that both these appeal and revision have been filed by one and the same party namely M/s. Informatics Computer Institute, Kanpur Nagar through its Regional Manager Sri Vivek Thakur.

4. The relevant facts pertaining to the appeal and revision both may be narrated as below:

Sri Pawan Kumar Gupta respondent of the appeal and the opposite party of the revision filed his Complaint No. 178/2006 praying for refund of the security amount of Rs.25,000 he had deposited with M/s. Informatics Computer Institute, Bithur, Kanpur Nagar. Certain sums were also claimed on the basis of an “accounting” between the two parties. Whereas the plea for refund of security was allowed by means of the impugned judgment dated 26.3.2008, his prayer for recovery of his dues as outstanding against the computer institute was turned down. The plea of the complainant, as put forward in his complaint, was that under an agreement with the aforesaid computer institute he had been running a computer institute in Unnao under the study centre of Mysore University and he had, for use of the franchisee, to pay a part of the fees to the appellant institute. Besides the rights of franchisee, the computer institute also had to render service in respect of the students’ studies and the examination etc. As usual a dispute arose between the two resulting in closure of the complainant’s Elegant Academy. He then filed the complaint for the two reliefs as indicated above. The complaint was allowed on 26.3.2008.

5.The appellant allegedly came to know about the judgment on 4.8.2008 and then moved a restoration application on 13.8.2008 which was dismissed on 28.4.2009. He then moved an application under Section 47 C.P.C. as also under Section 13(3B) of the Consumer Protection Act which was dismissed on 4.2.2010 giving rise to the revision in hand.

6. We have heard learned Counsel for both the parties at length.

7. The first objection raised on behalf of the respondent Sri Pawan Kumar Gupta against filing of the appeal is that it is utterly barred by time having been filed 709 days after the judgment and 576 days after the appellant acquired knowledge of the said judgment. It is pertinent to note that the appeal has been filed on 5.3.2010 with the delay in the sequence as disclosed above i.e. 709 days after the judgment and 576 days after the knowledge.

8. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant has, with reference to the affidavit of Sri Vivek Thakur, Regional Manager of Informatics Computer Institute, contended that the learned Counsel appearing before the Forum below on behalf of the institute was under the impression that the complaint case would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction but it was decreed on 26.3.2008 and the information about the said judgment had been received in the institute’s office on 4.8.2008. Then restoration application was filed on 13.8.2008 which was dismissed on 28.4.2009. As said above, the instant appeal was preferred on 5.3.2010 i.e. with inordinate delay. Though it is not credible that the appellant’s Counsel contesting the complaint before the Forum below had gathered an impression of the complaint being dismissed yet, even if for argument sake, it is held that the knowledge of the judgment came to the institute’s office on 4.8.2008 when a summon of the execution petiti