PANKAJ MUKHERJEE & ANR. Vs. SMT. SHANTI THAKUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petition is, in effect, by a bank but individual officers have been shown as the petitioners since such individuals were sued on behalf of the bank by the opposite party complainant in proceedings under the Consumer protection Act, 1986.

(2.) The grievance of the petitioning bank is that a delay of 163 days in preferring an appeal has not been condoned by the State Commission despite the petitioners indicating sufficient grounds therefor.

(3.) It is evident from the order impugned that four grounds were cited by the petitioner: the delay on the part of the law clerk of Advocate to obtain the certified copy of the order impugned; the delay due to the interior repair and renovation work taken up at the branch; the announcement of demonetisation; and, the puja vacation.