STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CIRCUIT BENCH NAGPUR MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. SC/CB2/27/MA/156/2022 IN SC/CB2/27/A/22/304 HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

PRESENT ADDRESS - THROUGH ITS GENERAL MANAGER , R/O 6TH FLOOR , LEENA BUSINESS PARK , ANDHERI KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI EAST, MUMBAI 400059 MAHARASHTRA ,MAHARASHTRA.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus SHITAL W/O UMESHCHANDRA SUKHDEVE PRESENT ADDRESS - R/O AT SHRINAGAR , GONDIA MAHARASHTRA,MAHARASHTRA.

MAHANT S/O UMESHCHANDRA SUKHDEVE PRESENT ADDRESS - R/O AT SHRINAGAR , GONDIA MAHARASHTRA,MAHARASHTRA.

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MRS. KALYANI KAPSE , PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MS. SHAILA D. WANDHARE , MEMBER FOR THE APPELLANT:

ADV. ARCHANA NARAD FOR THE APPLICANT.

FOR THE RESPONDENT:

NONE DATED: 17/04/2026

ORDER

(Delivered on 17/04/2026)

Per Mrs Kalyani Kapse, Hon’ble Presiding Member

1. The Applicant, Smt. Shital Wd/o Umeshchandra Sukhadeve and Other, Gondia has filed an appeal challenging the Final Order/Judgment dated 07/09/2022 passed by the Learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gondia (for the sake of brevity 'District Commission'), in complaint case No. CC/159/2021, filed under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 thereby partly allowed the complaint in favour of Non-applicant /Original Complainant. After filing of the application for condonation of delay, Notice was served to the non-applicant. Reply was filed on record.

2. We have heard Ms. Archana Narad, learned advocate for the applicant and None present for the non-applicant.

3. Applicant has contended that the learned District Commission passed Judgment on 07/09/2022. The said copy of the judgement delivered to the appellant on 13/09/2022 and was dispatched to the appellant at the office of Indore. The appellant received the said copy of judgement after the span of 7 days. After the receipt of the certified copy of the judgement of District Consumer Commission, Gondia the dealing counsel was requested to send all the records to the office of Appellant at Indore. That, the authorities at the Indore office of the appellant scrutinized the case papers and judgement delivered by the lower Commission. The authorities of the appellant office at Indore forwarded the file of case papers to the upper management for the scrutinization. Legal opinion sought from the counsel with regards to filing of the appeal.

4. From the date the copy was received l.e. 13/09/2022, the limitation to file an appeal was till 28/10/2022. In this period of time the appellant was in the process as mentioned above. That, the higher management took the decision upon the opinion provided by the counsel. The counsel also required fifteen days of time in going through the case papers and drafting the matter accordingly.

5. That, due to administrative process required to be fulfilled by the authorities in a corporate occurred 45 days of delay in preferring this present appeal. It is pertinent to mention here that, the management has to look after pan India and decision cannot be taken without the due verification and scrutinization of the matter. Therefore, it is prayed before this Hon'ble Commission to condone the delay of 45 days in preferring an appeal. Applicant prayed to condone the delay of 45 days in filing the appeal.

6. Non-applicant filed the reply and contended that the order passed by the learned District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Gondia is reasoned order considering all the facts and circumstances of the case. The appellant company deliberately and intentionally not filed the appeal within limitation only to frustrate the award/order of the learned District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Gondia. The appellant company has also not given sufficient reason/explanation in the application. Only the reason given is due to belated administrative permission the delay caused is not sufficient to condone the delay, hence the application for condonation may kindly be rejected.

7. We have carefully gon