STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION MADHYA PRADESH FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/23/A/24/1693 RAMESH PANDEY PRESENT ADDRESS - VILLAGE GULVASPUR TEHSIL CHURHAT DIST. SIDHI MP,MADHYA PRADESH.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus MANAGER THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY PRESENT ADDRESS - THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED B.T.D.G.I, M.G.

ROAD FORT MUMBAI MH,MADHYA PRADESH.

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MRS. DR. MONIKA MALIK , PRESIDING MEMBER FOR THE APPELLANT:

RAMESH PANDEY FOR THE RESPONDENT:

MANAGER THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY DATED: 25/09/2025

ORDER

M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL FIRST APPEAL NO. 1693 OF 2024 (Arising out of order dated 07.07.2023 passed in C.C.No.90/2019 by District Commission, Rewa)

RAMESH PANDEY S/O BHAIYALAL PANDEY, R/O VILLAGE-GULVASPUR, TEHSIL-CHURHAT, DISTRICT-SIDHI (M.P) … APPELLANT Versus THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD THROUGH MANAGER, NARENDRA NAGAR, REWA & B.T.D.G.I. MG ROAD, FORT, MUMBAI … RESPONDENTS.

BEFORE:

HON’BLE DR. (MRS) MONIKA MALIK : PRESIDING MEMBER COUNSEL FOR PARTIES:

Shri Arun Goswami, learned counsel for the appellant.

Shri Harpreet Singh Gupta, learned counsel for the respondents.

O R D E R (Passed On 25.09.2025) As per Dr. Monika Malik:

Heard learned counsel for the parties on IA-1 application for condonation of delay in filing appeal.

2. This appeal by the complainant/appellant arises out of the order dated 07.07.2023 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rewa (For short ‘District Commission’) in C.C.No.90/2019 whereby the complaint filed by him has been dismissed.

3. As per office report, this appeal against the order dated 07.07.2023 filed on 02.09.2024 is barred by 1 year. In IA-1, the application dated 02.09.2024 for condonation of delay, the reasons stated are that during the trial and after receiving the impugned order the appellant's daughter fell seriously ill. She was having severe abdominal pain with nausea and vomiting and required urgent medical attention. It is further stated that the appellant had to prioritize her daughter's medical care and had to attend to her during this critical period, which prevented him from attending to the preparation and filing of the present appeal. After her daughter's condition stabilized, the appellant had to gather necessary documents and seek legal advice, which also contributed to the delay in filing appeal. It was thus prayed that the delay in filing the appeal be condoned.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there was no malafide intention in filing the appeal belated. The delay caused is neither intentional nor due to negligence. The appellant has a strong case on merits and substantial grounds to challenge the impugned order. The appellant has shown reasons for the delay caused in the application for condonation of delay. He argued that if the application is not allowed and the delay is not condoned, the appellant will suffer irreparable loss and injury and a great miscarriage of justice will occcur. He argued that the ends of justice demand that the delay in filing appeal be condoned. He relied upon the decisions in International Assn.of Lions Clubs Vs Jagjit Singh Khanna 2008 SCC OnLine MP 726, State of M.P. Vs Naresh Grover 2013 SCC OnLine MP 6390, Asharam Vs Ganga Bai 2005 SCC OnLine MP 477 and in Sumarwatibai Vs Mines Manager 2010 SCC OnLine MP 915 in support of his contentions.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposed the prayer and argued that there is no sufficient cause given by the appellant to condone inordinate delay of more than one year. He therefore prayed for not allowing the application for condonation of delay and for dismissing the appeal.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and on going through the reasons stated in the application for condonation of delay as also the medical papers enclosed with the application I find that the medical papers regarding ailment of appellant's daughter are o