Date of filing :03.02.2023 Date of order :10.02.2023 MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION,MUMBAI, BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

MISC.APPLICATION NO.: 134 OF 2023 REVISION PETITION NO. : 10 OF 2023 IN COMPLAINT CASE NO.: 274 OF 2021 DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM : AHMEDNAGAR.

Kiran A.Kangare, Prop.Shubham Motors, Auto Car Care Works, Nagar-Aurangabad Highway, Newasa Phata, Tq.Newasa , Dist.Ahmednagar. ..REVISION PETITIONER VERSUS

1. Poulas Gulab Bhingardev, 2. Sunita Bhanudas Gaikwad, Both R/o Tugandh Colony, Behind Pharmacy College, Cottage Corner, Savedi, Ahmednagar. …RESPONDENTS CORAM : Smt.S.T.Barne, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member.

Mr.K.M.Lawande, Hon’ble Member.

Present : Adv.A.R.Muley for rev.petitioner.

J U D G M E N T (Delivered on 10/02/2023)

Per Smt.S.T.Barne, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member.

1. Revision petitioner Kiran Kangare has filed this revision petition along with delay condonation application for setting aside the order which is passed by District Commission in C.C.No.274/2021 on order to proceed without written statement dated 14/10/2022.

2. It is submitted that revision petitioner was ill and therefore he could not file his written version before District Commission within time and District Commission has rejected his application for adjournment filed on 23/08/2022 by order dated 14/10/2022. It is submitted that due to illness of revision petitioner, it has caused 41 days delay to prefer this appeal against said order.

3. It is apparent that this revision petitioner has caused 44 days delay without supporting documents to show that applicant was ill and therefore revision petitioner could not file revision within stipulated period. It is apparent that revision petition is filed against order of District Commission rejecting his application seeking adjournment for filing written version. It is disposed of on 14/10/2022 with the observation that in view of order of Hon'ble Apex Court, period of limitation cannot be extended beyond 45 days. Hence no adjournment can be granted. It is submitted that now the matter is kept for further proceeding without written statement .

4. On perusal of record it reveals that notice was issued to the opponent on 16/11/2021 with specific direction for appearance on 18/01/2022 and to file written version within one month from service of notice. However, it revealed that this revision petitioner gave appearance before District Forum along with application seeking adjournment to file written version on 23/08/2022. In the application dated 23/08/2022 itself, this revision petitioner has admitted that he has caused delay to file written version within 45 days. Still he was seeking adjournment for filing written version. However, said application filed by him on 23/08/2022 is decided by District Commission on 14/10/2022 thereby rejecting application for seeking time written version. In this matter, applicant has not submitted on what date he received notice, issued by District Commission. It was issued on 16/11/2021. The date of actual service is suppressed. From his application dated 23/08/2022 it reveals that on that date this revision petitioner was having knowledge that it has already caused delay in filing written version. Even if it is accepted that it was his first date for appearance on 23/08/2022, from that date also written version is not submitted within time. After lapsed of 45 days from his appearance, the District Commission has passed an order on 14/10/2022 on his application dt.23/08/2022 that opponent, the present revision petitioner, cannot be permitted to file written version beyond 45 days in view of order of Hon'ble Apex Court.

After deciding reference pending before Hon'ble Apex Court dated

20/03/2020, it is specifically made clear that during pending the reference before Apex Court the Consumer Fora was permitted to decide the application of delay condonation in filing written statement if sufficient reason is made out. This discretion is not continued after pass