DILIP D KALE Vs. VITHAL MARUTI RAO EKABOTE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR . N.V. Sharma Advocate for the appellant absent. Heard Respondent in person.

(2.) THIS appeal was filed on 23.7.2010. It was first time listed for admission on 24.9.2010. Alongwith this appeal there is delay condonation application. Said delay condonation application appeared before the State Commission on 24.9.2010. On 24.9.2010 recording absence of the applicant/appellant matter was adjourned to 29.10.2010. It appears that on 14.10.2010 the matter was mentioned before the Bench No.2 and they directed to keep the matter before Bench No.l on 15.10.2010. On 15.10.2010 it appeared before Bench No.l. It appears that on that date the stay was granted on deposit of the total amount as directed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum minus the amount which has been already deposited, at the time of filing an appeal.

(3.) IT further appears that as per the scheduled date 29.10.2010 it appeared before Bench No.2. However, Mr. N.V. Sharma Advocate for the applicant made a request to amend the delay condonation application and the time was granted. However, we do not find as to whether the amount was deposited by the appellant as per direction dated 15.10.2010. It is not known whether the said amount has been deposited or not. Thereafter delay condonation application appeared on 6.1.2011. On that date Mr. Sharma -Advocate for the appellant made an oral request and time was granted. It was adjourned to 25.4.2011. On 25.4.2011 Mr. Sharma was absent. His clerk who had no licence issued to work as clerk appeared before us. We passed an order on that date fixing the matter today subject to payment of cost of Rs.2,000 to be paid to respondent, who was present on that date.