Reserved

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

U.P. Lucknow.

Appeal  No. 2620 of  2016

1- Lucknow Vikas Pradhikaran dwara

    Upadhyaksh, 6-Jagdish Chandra Bose  Marg,

    Lucknow. Vartman Pata, Naveen Bhawan,

    Vipin Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.

2- Lucknow Vikas Pradhikaran dwara

    Sachiv, Naveen Bhawan, Vipin Khand,

    Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.

3- Lucknow Vikas Pradhikaran dwara

    Sampatti Adhikar (Priyadarshni Yojna),

    Naveen Bhawan, Vipin Khand,

    Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.                                …Appellants.                                                                         

K.P. Srivastava s/o Late Sri S.S. Sriastava,

R/o 179/1//, Naval Ashram, Baroodkhana,

Golaganj, Janpad, Lucknow.                       ….…Respondent.

Present:-

1- Hon’ble Sri Rajendra  Singh, Presiding Member.

2- Hon’ble Sri Sushil Kumar, Member.

Sri Malesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate for appellants.

Sri Shivan Pandey, Advocate for the respondent.

Date  2.11.2021

JUDGMENT

Per Mr. Rajendra Singh, Member: The appellant has moved an application dated 19.10.2016 for condonation of delay accompanied by an affidavit dated 19.10.2016.

          We have heard ld. Counsel for the appellants Sri Malesh Kumar Pandey and ld. Counsel for the respondent Sri Shivam Pandey and perused all the pleadings, documents filed by the parties.

          The appellant has stated in his affidavit that he is working as Joint Secretary, Lucknow Vikas Pradhikaran. A complaint has been filed before the ld. District Forum which

(2)

was decided on 13.7.2012 but no information has been given to the authority either by the complainant or by the Advocate of the LDA. The appellant came to know about the judgment when he received a letter sent by his Advocate on 18.7.2016 in relation to execution case no.13 of 2016. After that, he directed his Advocate to get copy of the judgment and thereafter, an appeal was prepared and sent to the Secretary who gave his consent on 21.9.2016. Thereafter, the file was again sent to the Secretary, LDA for appointing an Advocate. Thereafter, Vakalatnama was received and the file was sent the account section for preparation of the Bank Draft. On 17.10.2016, after receiving the bank draft a letter has been sent to file appeal on 17.10.2016. After completing formalities the instant appeal has been filed. There was no delay caused intentionally. Therefore, this delay is liable to be condoned.

          The counsel for the respondent stated that the judgment by the ld. District Forum was delivered on 13.7.2012 and this appeal has been filed on 19.10.2016. There is no satisfactory explanation of day by day delay.   

          We have seen the judgment dated 13.7.2012. It has been written in the judgment that the Advocate of the opposite parties appeared and file his power but he did not file any written statement. Therefore, on 13.10.2018 the case was proceeded ex-parte and they judgment delivered.

          Now it is clear that during the proceeding before the ld. District Forum, the counsel for the opposite parties appeared and filed his Vakalatnama. Therefore, limitation will start

(3)

from the date of judgment i.e. 13.7.2012. No satisfactory explanation has been given for the delay which is more than 4 years.

          The delay has not been satisfactorily explained, therefore, it is prima-