PRINCIPAL IITT COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING Vs. PURNIMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is an application for condonation of delay of 29 days in filing the appeal against the order dated 26.8.2002 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nawanshahr (hereinafter called the District Forum ).

(2.) It is stated in the application for condonation of delay that the certified copy of the impugned order dated 26.8.2002 was received by the applicant-appellants' office clerk on 16.9.2002. The ground taken for condonation of delay in the application is that the Principal of the applicant-College was away to Jaipur on vacation. Every effort was made by the clerk to contact the Principal but all the efforts went in vain as nobody at his Jaipur residence was receiving telephonic calls and it was only on 9.11.2002 that the concerned clerk of the applicant-college was able to contact the Principal on telephone and thereafter the Principal engaged the services of the Counsel on 11.11.2002 and the appeal was filed on 15.11.2002.

(3.) Notice was issued in the Misc. application and the reply was filed. In the reply averments made in the application have been rebutted. It has been stated in the reply that though it has been mentioned in the application that the Principal of the College was vacationing somewhere in South from 16.9.2002 to 9.11.2002, in fact, this was not a vacation period in the college. It is stated in the reply that even if it is presumed that during the relevant period the Principal of the College was not available then some kind of stop-gap arrangement must have been made by the College Authorities and somebody must have been appointed to act on behalf of the Principal during the relevant period. It is also stated in the application that the Vice-Principal of the College was also a party to the proceedings. The appeal could have been filed well within time with his approval only.