BABLU SHEIKH Vs. DIRECTOR GPO AND ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the Appellant out of time by 107 days including the statutory period of limitation from the date of passing of the judgment by the learned Forum below.

(2.) IN the petition for condonation of delay it has been contended by the Appellant that after passing of the judgment by the learned Forum below he consulted with the learned Advocate, entrusted with his case before tha learned Forum below, who advised him to prefer an appeal before the State Commission. Thereafter, the Appellant applied for certified copy, but unfortunately on 12.3.2011 due to motorcycle accident he got injury in his right leg and as a result of which he became confined to bed till the end of April, 2011. After recovery, two weeks were required to walk properly and on 24.5.2011 he obtained the certified copy of the impugned order and thereafter met with his learned Advocate for preferring of the Appeal. The learned Advocate advised him to appoint an Advocate at Kolkata for preferring of an appeal and conducting the case before the Commission. But as the Appellant was not in a sound financial condition, he personally came before this Commission for preferring of this Appeal. He took help of Legal Service Authority. Alipore and on 27.5.2011 he met the Legal Service Authority and submitted his application for appointment of an Advocate for preferring of an appeal. After receiving the application the LSA told him to come after two or three days alongwith relevant papers and on 31.5.2011 he again came and found that learned Advocate Mr. D. Roy was appointed as his Advocate. The Appellant met with him and handed over all the necessary papers and documents on 14.6.2011. The said learned Advocate took two weeks for perusal of the papers and prepared the memo of appeal on 28.6.2011 the Appellant put his signature in the memo of appeal as well as petition for condonation of delay. In this way the above -mentioned days were consumed for preferring of this Appeal. It has been further stated by the Appellant that if the delay is not condoned the Appellant will suffer irreparable loss and injury and accordingly prayer has been made for allowing the petition for condonation of delay.

(3.) THE Respondent was present through the learned Advocate, who raised vehement objection against the petition for condonation of delay stating that the instant petition is liable to be dismissed as there is no satisfactory explanation about the long delay of 107 days and accordingly prayer was made for dismissal of the petition for condonation of delay. We have perused the petition and heard the objection of the Respondent as advanced by the learned Advocate. It is seen by us that the order impugned was passed by the learned Forum below on 23.2.2011, application was made for the certified copy of the judgment on 24.5.2011 and on the same date it was supplied to the Complainant by the learned Forum below. The present appeal was preferred by the Appellant on 30.6.2011. Therefore, admittedly there is delay of 107 days in preferring of this appeal from the date of passing of the impugned judgment by the learned Forum below. As the Appellant is entitled to get the statutory period of limitation of 30 days, hence there is delay of 77 days in preferring of this appeal. It has been contended that he was bed -ridden due to an accident and even after recovery he consumed two weeks as he could not walk properly. Thereafter he met the State Legal Services Authority for help and accordingly the SLA has appointed one Advocate, who took two weeks for perusal of the papers and documents and preparation of the memo of appeal as well as the petition for condonation of delay. After preparing the same the Appellant put his signature and filed this appeal before this Commission. Admittedly the Appellant did not submit any medical document in support of contention that he was bed -ridden for a long period due to the accident. The Respondent has 'raised objection in this respect, but as the consumer complaint has been dismissed by the learned Forum below and apart from the said medical document the explanation is more or less satisfactory, we are inclined to allow the instant petition in the interest of justice subject to payment of cost of Rs.300 payable to the SCWF.