H. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION SHIMLA Misc. Application No. : 132/2021 in First Appeal No. : 37/2021 Date of Presentation: 23.08.2021 Date of Order : 09.11.2022 ….……

The Deoli Cooperative Agriculture Service Society Ltd., VPO Deoli, Tehsil Ghanari, District Una, H.P., through its President Surinder Singh S/o Sh. Dilabag Singh R/o Village & P.O. Deoli, Tehsil Ghanari, District Una, H.P.

.…Applicant/Appellant Versus

1. Smt. Krishna Devi wife of Sh. Rashpal Singh, R/o Village &

P.O. Deoli, Tehsil Ghanari, District Una, H.P.

2. Jatinder Singh S/o Bhupinder R/o Village & P.O. Deoli, Tehsil Ghanari, District Una, H.P., Secretary, The Deoli Coop. Agri. Service Society Ltd., VPO Deoli, Tehsil Ghanari, District Una, H.P.

..…Non-applicants/Respondents ________________________________________________________

Coram Hon’ble Justice Inder Singh Mehta, President Hon’ble Ms. Sunita Sharma, Member Hon’ble Mr. R.K.Verma, Member Whether approved for reporting?

For the Appellant : Mr. Rishabh Chandel, Advocate vice Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Suri, Advocate.

For the Respondents : None.

Justice Inder Singh Mehta, President (Oral)

O R D E R

M.A. No.132/2021 Present Miscellaneous application under section 41 of the

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the order?

Consumer Protection Act, 2019 has been filed by the applicant seeking exemption to deposit 50% of the awarded amount in terms of order passed by learned District Commission in filing appeal.

2. Learned counsel of the applicant has submitted that the order the learned District Forum is without jurisdiction and the record of the appellant Society are with the police and as such Society was unable to even admit or deny the contentions as raised in the complaint.

3. Many opportunities have already been granted to the appellant to remove the objection. The learned counsel during the course of argument has reiterated that society is unable to deposit the 50% of the awarded amount in terms of order passed by learned District Forum below.

4. Section-41 provides for filing appeal against the order of District Commission, which reads as under:-

41. Any person aggrieved by an order made by the District Commission may prefer an appeal against such order to the State Commission on the grounds of facts or law within a period of forty-five days from the date of the order, in such form and manner, as may be prescribed:

Provided that the State Commission may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of forty-five days, if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing it within that period:

Provided further that no appeal by a person, who is required to pay any amount in terms of an order of the District Commission, shall be entertained by the State Commission unless the appellant has deposited fifty per cent. of that amount in the manner as may be prescribed:

Provided also that no appeal shall lie from any order passed under sub-section (1) of section 81 by the District Commission pursuant to a settlement by mediation under section 80.

5. A bare perusal of Section-41 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, reveals that no appeal by a person against the order of District Commission can be entertained by the State Commission unless the appellant has deposited 50% of the amount as awarded by the District Commission below.

6. In view of mandatory provision in the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, to deposit 50% amount as awarded by the District Commission to institute an appeal before State Commission, this Commission despite giving many opportunities to deposit 50% of the amount as required under section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019, appellant fails to do the needful. Consequentially, the Miscellaneous Application No.132/2021 is dismissed.

7. Since application bearing M.A. No.132/2021 filed for seeking exemption to deposit 50% of the awarded amount in terms of order of the District Commission in filing appeal has been dismissed, the present appeal cannot be entertaine