IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Date of Institution:08.04.2024 Date of hearing : 25.04.2024 Date of Decision : 29.04.2024 FIRST APPEAL NO. 262/2024 IN THE MATTER OF MR. MOHIT KUMAR SURYAWANSHI THROUGH HIS FATHER/AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE S/O MR. MADAN LAL SURYAWANSHI R/O RGA-58, KHAYALA NEAR RAGHUBIR NAGAR NEW DELHI-110027 …APPLICANT/APPELLANT (Through Mr. Madan Lal Suryawanshi Authorized Representative Email: mlsuryawanshi03@gmail.com Mobile No. 9313354666)

VERSUS SHRI RAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. PVT. LTD.

27, SECOND FLOOR, COMMUNITY CENTRE INDUSTRIAL AREA, NARAINA NEW DELHI-110028 ....NON-APPLICANT/ RESPONDENT CORAM:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT)

HON’BLE JUSTICE MS. PINKI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

Present: Mr. Madan Kumar Suryawanshi (Email ID mlsuryawanshi03@gmail.com and Mobile No. 9313354666), Father and Authorized Representative of the appellant.

None for the respondent.

PER: HON’BLE MS. PINKI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

1. The present appeal has been filed on 08.04.2024 challenging the impugned order dated 11.09.2023 passed in Complaint Case No.277/2016 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-VIII (Central District), Kashmere Gate, Delhi-110006 wherein the complaint was allowed.

2. This order will dispose off an application bearing IA No.1051/2024 seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal, filed along with the appeal. Affidavit of Mr. Madan Kumar Suryawanshi, Father/Authorized Representative of the appellant has been filed along with this application.

3. Record has been carefully and thoroughly perused.

4. The application has been moved without mentioning any provision of law. However, it is being considered under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as it is arising out of Complaint Case No.277/2016.

5. The bare perusal of the application filed reflects that it has been preferred without mentioning any provision of law. However, the entire proceedings of the present case took place according to the Old Act. Hence, before delving into the merits of the present application, it is imperative to ascertain whether the present application bearing IA No.1051/2024 filed along with the appeal on

08.04.2024 is maintainable under the New Act/Old Act.

6. The repeal of a law shall not affect the previous operation of any enactment i.e. the proceedings under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 shall continue for cases which had been filed prior to the implementation of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 on 20.07.2020. The same can be gauged through the repeal and saving section (Section 107) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 which has been reproduced below:

“107. (1) The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is hereby repealed.

(2) Notwithstanding such repeal, anything done or any action taken or purported to have been done or taken under the Act hereby repealed shall, in so far as it is not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, be deemed to have been done or taken under the corresponding provisions of this Act.

(3) The mention of particular matters in sub-section (2) shall not be held to prejudice or affect the general application of section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 with regard to the effect of repeal.”

7. We may also take the assistance of Section 6 (b) of the General Clauses Act, 1897 to further this view. Section 6 (b) of the General Clauses Act, 1897 has been reproduced below:

“6 Effect of repeal. : Where this Act, or any 1 [Central Act] or Regulation made after the commencement of this Act, repeals any enactment hitherto made or hereafter to be made, then, unless a different intention appears, the repeal shall not (a) revive anything not in force or existing at the time at which the repeal takes effect; or (b) affect the previous operation of any enactment so repealed or anything duly done or suffered thereunder”

8. Moreover, unless the legislature explicitly provides that the amendment is retrospective in nature, it will be considered prospective. The aforesaid view has been take