IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION GUJARAT STATE, AHMEDABAD.

Revision Petition NO. 43/2022 Court No. 1

1. IBIBO Group Pvt. Ltd.

Registered Office At;

19^th floor, Epitome Building No.5, DLF Cyber City, DLF Phase-III, Gurugram, Haryana-122002 …Petitioner Vs

1. Himanshu Shashikantbhai Vora Nitaben Himanshu Vora

9, Manasarovar Flat, Near Deep Part Plot Tilaknagar Road, Bhavnagar-364001.

2. Yatin Fugro Add. Hotel Kohinoor, Fofrara Fudam, opp.Azzaro Resort, DIU-Nagoa Road, Dio.362520

3. Hotel Kohinoor.

Manager shree/Administrator shree Resi: Hotel Kohinoor Fofrara fudam Opp: Ajola Resort, Div-Nagara Road, Div-362520.

4. The Managing Director The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd.

Main Bajar DIO-362520.

5. The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd.

Regional Office Add: 3rd floor, Navjivan Trust Building, B/h Gujarat Vidhyapith, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380014 …Respondents Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.P.Patel, President Hon’ble Ms. A.C.Raval, Member Apperence : Ms. N.K.Vora Patel for the petitioner Order by Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.P.Patel, President

1. The Petitioner/ Original opponent has filed this revision petition under section 47 (1) (b) of the Consumer Protection Act 2019, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 26.08.2022 passed by the learned Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission Bhavnagar in miscellaneous application for production of document filed in MA.No.05/2021

2. Heard learned advocate Ms.N.K.Vora for the petitioner. Considering facts and circumstance of the case this commission deem fit not to issue notice to the other side. Hence, no notice is issued.

3. Order under challenged: the Learned Distinct Commission has passed below mentioned order;

“Heard Learned Advocate for the applicant. The other side has filed an objection at-page.

Considering facts and circumstances of present applicant on hand and principal of natural justice couple with object of the consumer Protection Act, the 241 days delay he condoned this order be passed in respect of complaint in further proceeding.

The office directed to register the case 26/08/2022. ”

3. Fact of the case: That the original complainant wants to file Consumer Complaint which was not within time limit prescribed by the Consumer Protection Act. Therefore, he has filed delay Condon application Miscellaneous application no.05/2021, which was granted by the Learned District Commission and ordered to register the complaint. The said order is challenged in this petition.

4. Argument of the petitioner: Learned Advocate for the petitioner has argued that the order passed by the Learned District Commission is nonspeaking order. That the Learned District Commission has miserably failed to accord any reason, so as to why it has condoned huge delay. That the Learned District Commission has miserably failed to appreciate the fact that the respondent no.1 & 2 in the original application have miserably failed to account for each and every day of delay, after the expiry of the limitation in the present case. That the Learned Distinct Commission has not considered the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court on condonation of delay and limitation period. That the complainant was negligent on his part. That the no reasonable grounds are made out in the delay condon application. She has requested to allow the petition and quashed and set aside the impugned judgment.

Merit of the case:

5. On perusing the impugned order it appears that the delay condon application was filed on 20/07/2021. The same was disposed of on 26/08/2022. It is stated in para 1 that the complaint has to filed Consumer Complaint on 06/04/2020 but due to death of his only son they could not filed complaint within time limit.

6. The country was suffering from Corona epidemic from March 2020 till May 2022. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has also taken up suo moto writ petition and directed that no limitation Act will be apply during the epidemic situation. The