Court liberally construes 'sufficient cause' for condoning delay in filing appeals to ensure substantial justice.

Per - Hon’ble Mr. Vijay C. Premchandani, Member.

1. The Applicant/ Appellant has moved an Application for condonation of delay to file present Appeal against the impugned order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South Mumabi in Consumer Case No.CC/30/2011 dated 07-12-2018.

2. The Appellant contended in the application that the impugned order was pronounced on 07-12-2018 by Hon’ble District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South Mumabi, the certified copy which was received by the Advocate for the Appellant as on 11-01-2019 by hand. The Advocate for the Appellant No.2 informed to the Appellant. The Applicant/ Appellant No.2 could not taken meeting with Advocate due to extreme old age and medical issues of the Applicant/ Appellant. The Applicant/ Appellant No.2 is senior citizen and could not contact his Advocate immediately after receipt of the said order due to extreme old age and for medical reasons. The copy of the medical certificate produced on the record. There is

12 days delay to file the present Appeal. Hence Applicant/ Appellant prayed to condone the delay of 12 days for filing present Appeal.

3. Notice on delay condonation application was sent to the Respondent. Respondent appeared and objected the present application by filing the reply stating that there is no sufficient ground condonation of delay to filing Appeal. It is prayed by Respondent Appeal is to be dismissed with cost. It is contended that there is no duration provided for the treatment taken by the Appellant. In present application which ground mentioned is not proper. Hence present application be rejected.

4. Heard the argument from both sides on codonation of delay application as well as perused application alongiwth documents. It shows that Applicant/ Appellant No.2 has filed the medical certificate contended that Complainant No.2 was regularly treated by the concern Doctor and the applicant is facing medical treatment, he has reduced mobility due to pain in his legs, knees and hip so, he us advised to take rest and to continue this treatment some more time. The Counsel for the Applicant/ Appellant has filed the certificate, it brought to the Registration of the Doctor.

5. After perusal of material on record, this Commission finds that the expression “sufficient cause” should be construed liberally to advance substantial justice. The Hon’ble Supre Court of India, in State of Bihar Vs. Kaneshwar Prasad Sing (2009) 9 SCC 94, observed: “ The term ‘Sufficient cause’ should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice when no negligence or inaction is imputable to the party seeking condonation”. Similarly, in Balwant Singh Vs. Jagdish Singh (2010) 8 SCC 685 it was held, “Sufficient cause should be based on bonafide reasons and the Court must asses whether the Party was diligent in pursing the matter”.

6. Considering the reasons provided by the Appellant, this Commission find that the delay is satisfactory explained and the Appellant has not acted negligently. In the interest of justice we pass the following order.

ORDER

1. The present Miscellaneous Application for condonation of delay is hereby allowed.

2. The delay of 12 days for filing Appeal is condoned.

3. Appeal is hereby admitted. Issue notice to Respondent.

Next date 15-09-2025.

4. Copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of cost.