The main legal point established is the court's discretion to condone delay in filing appeals, especially when a satisfactory explanation is provided and considering the pending cross appeal for enhancement of compensation.

ORDER

K.S. Chaudhari, (P.M) - This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against order dated 18-09-2013 passed by the learned State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (in short, 'the State Commission'), in Appeal No. 717 of 2010 - Standard Chartered Bank v. Hira Lal Yadav, by which appeal was dismissed as barred by limitation.

2. Brief facts of the case are that Complainant/respondent filed complaint against opposite party/appellant before District Forum and learned District Forum vide order dated 19-04-2010 allowed complaint and directed opposite party to refund Rs.99,000/-, the cost of vehicle and to pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation for mental agony. Appeal filed by opposite party was dismissed by learned State vide impugned order against which this revision petition has been filed.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused record.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in spite of reasonable explanation for condonation of delay and pendency of cross appeal filed by complainant, learned State Commission committed error in dismissing appeal as barred by limitation, hence revision petition be allowed and impugned order be set aside and matter may be remanded back to State Commission for deciding appeal on merits. On the other hand learned counsel for the respondent submitted that order passed by learned State Commission is in accordance with law, hence revision petition be dismissed.

5. It is not disputed that opposite party filed appeal with delay of 126 days on the ground that Legal Officer, who was looking after the matter resigned from Bank without prior intimation and handing over charge of his work and when another officer took charge he came to know about the order of the District Forum. Apparently, it is satisfactory explanation for condonation of delay particularly when cross appeal filed by the complainant for enhancement of compensation is already pending before State Commission. Learned State Commission should have condoned delay subject to cost. Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 10120-10121 of 2014- Jeevanti Devi v. Commercial Motors & Anr.; Civil Appeal No(s). 10289 of 2014- A.T.S. Govindarajane v. Chief Manager, State Bank of India; Civil Appeal No. 5071 of 2014- Taipen Traders Ltd. & Anr. v. M/s. Bhawani Cold Storage & Ors.; condoned delay of 135 days, 149 days and 218 days, respectively, in filing revision petition and remanded matter for disposal on merits.

6. In the light of aforesaid judgments, I deem it appropriate to allow revision petition and condone delay subject to cost.

7. Consequently, revision petition filed by the petitioner is allowed and impugned order dated 18-09-2013 passed by learned State Commission in Appeal No. 717 of 2010 Standard Chartered Bank v. Hira Lal Yadav is set aside and delay in filing appeal before State Commission is condoned subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- to the respondent on or before the next date before State Commission. Learned State Commission is directed to decide appeal on merits along with cross appeal after giving an opportunity of being heard to the parties.

8. Parties are directed to appear before the learned State Commission on 14-12-2015.