Condonation of delay in consumer disputes requires a showing of sufficient cause and diligence; excessive delay without a cogent explanation, especially when the order predates general limitation extensions (like COVID-19), justifies dismissal to maintain the purpose of expeditious adjudication.

Per : Dr. Nisha Amol Chavhan, Member

1. The Appellant filed the present Appeal challenging the order 14.01.2019 passed by the Ld. DCDRC, Central Mumbai, in Consumer Complaint No.CC/86/2015 with delay condonation application.

2. The Applicant submitted that, being aggrieved by the order dated 14-01-2019 is filing this First Appeal. They had received Free Order copy on 19-01-2019, the endorsement on the certified copy obtained on 19-01-2019 that the order dated 14-01-2019 was received by the Appellant on 19-01-2019 considering the period of limitation under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 the Appellant ought to have filed the Appeal within 45 days from the date of receipt of the order which expired on 04-03-2019 however Appeal is filed on 02-05-2022 that is with the delay period of 1155 days the delay is not intentional and deliberate.

3. The Applicant states that after receiving the order in the month of January, 2019, Applicant made best possible attempts to contact the Respondents for settling the dispute but all the efforts of the Applicant went unattended, hence being left with no option in terms of letter dt 01-03-2019 Applicant requested Respondent to accept the demand draft towards the compliance of order, but Respondent refused to accept the same.

4. The Applicant then consulted their Advocate, who advised them to inform the concerned Commission regarding their intention to comply with the order. Simultaneously Applicant on several occasion tried their best to settle the dispute by complying with the order but Respondent has challenged the order passed by District Commission.

5. The Applicant stated that they informed to their Advocate regarding notice received in First Appeal, but the concerned Advocate due to some personal difficulty refused to take up the Appeal matter. Then finally Applicant appointed Advocate Sandeep Bhagat to defend the Appeal and as per his advice Applicant filed reply to the Application for condonation of delay. And he was also instructed to file Appeal challenging the order.

6. The Applicant was under impression that they have also filed Appeal but when Advocate Sandeep Bhagat was not able to provide Appeal number, Applicant had serious doubts regarding filing of Appeal and despite of constant follow up Adv Bhagat failed to give appointment so that Applicant could understand the status and progress of matter. The Applicant was waiting for confirmation from their Advocate and then on 22nd March 2020 due to Covid-2019 pandemic National Lockdown was declared as a result of appeal could not be filed. After certain relaxation, the Appeal memo was finalized in the month of April 2022 and the same is ready and filed on 02-05-2022, hence there is delay in filing Appeal from the date of free certified copy and from the date of obtaining certified copy of order. And since Supreme Court has extended the limitation period from 12-03-2020, which is further extended from time to time till 28-02-2022, so if delay is computed by exempting period of 12-03-2020 to 28-02-2022 then there is delay 437 number of days.

7. The Applicant submitted that in view of reasons mentioned above, as delay is not deliberate and intentional and this Commission may condone the same, otherwise grave prejudice and hardship will be caused to the Applicant. The Respondent has already challenged order so no prejudice will cause to the Respondent on delay being condoned. In view of above submissions, the Applicant most prays that State Commission to