KARAMVIR SAINI Vs. KARAM JIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this revision, challenge by opposite party No.3 petitioner is to the order dated 6.4.2010 of Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Haryana, Panchkula declining to condone delay of 1553 days in filing appeal and dismissing the appeal as barred by limitation against the order dated 19.10.2005 of a District Forum. Submission advanced by Shri Karan Singh, Advocate for the petitioner is that in the cause title of the complaint, the name of the petitioner was not disclosed nor did he authorize any counsel to appear on his behalf before the Fora below and came to know of the order of the District Forum only on 30.1.2010 on issue of arrest warrants against him in execution proceedings. In support of former limb of submission, he has drawn attention to the copy of complaint at pages 30 to 36.

(2.) In the cause title of complaint the opposite party No.3 is described as Authorized signatory, Skybird Overseas Pvt. Ltd., SCO 811, 2nd Floor NAC, Panchkula (UT). Below it there is a remark that opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 are to disclose the name of opposite party No.3. Along with revision petition the petitioner has filed copy of the order sheets of the District Forum. In the orders dated 4.6.04 and 5.7.04 the presence of petitioner/opposite party No.3 is recorded in person. It is not the case of petitioner that his appearance had been wrongly recorded on 4.6.04 and 5.7.04 by the District Forum. Moreover, the correctness of those two orders cannot be doubted. Thus, the stand taken that the petitioner came to know of the proceedings including the award of the District Forum only on 30.1.2010 in execution proceedings is belied by the said two orders of the District Forum. Petitioner has to blame himself for not defending the case before the District Forum.

(3.) In this backdrop, we are not inclined to interfere with the order of State Commission in declining to condone the said delay and dismissing appeal as barred by limitation, in revisional jurisdiction under Section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Revision petition is, therefore, dismissed. Revision dismissed.