SURESH JAIN Vs. DURGA PRASAD AGRAWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) this appeal under Sec.15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 , has been preferred against the order dated 17.8.199 passed by District Forum, Sarguja, Ambikapur in Complaint No.71/93. As the appeal is time-barred, an application for condonation of delay has also been filed under Sec.5 of the Limitation Act.

(2.) It has been stated in the application that the appellant had earlier filed an appeal before the State Commission which was registered as Appeal No.676/2000 but as the said appeal was not accompanied by any application for condonation of delay, the same was dismissed on 29.11.2000. The reason for filing the earlier appeal belatedly has been stated as that the complainant had filed an execution case under Sec.27 and the same was fixed on 17.2.2000 before the Distt. Forum and the appellant had engaged Mr. Jainarayan on his behalf to attend the execution case. It has been stated in the application that the said Counsel had obtained a certified copy of the order on the aforesaid date but between Bilaspur and Nagpur the coat of the Advocate was stolen together with the certified copy of the order. Thereafter, the Counsel again obtained certified copy of the order on 27.3.2000 and handed it over to the appellant. Particulars of the dates of the events mentioned in the application are not specified and only the year 2000 or April 2000 has been mentioned. It has further been averred that the delay in filing the appeal as well as inability to file an application under Sec.5 was bona fide and may be condoned.

(3.) An affidavit of May, 2000 has been filed in support of the application for condonation of delay. It has been stated in the affidavit that the deponent was appointed by the appellant Suresh Jain to attend the execution proceedings before the District Forum, Sarguja which was fixed on 17.2.2000 and the deponent attended the said proceedings and filed Vakalatnama and also filed an application for grant of certified copy of the order and order sheet. The said copies were delivered to him. However, while on way from Bilaspur to Nagpur the bag containing aforesaid certified copy and other copies and coat was stolen. Thereafter, the deponent applied for the copies of the order and order sheet afresh on 24.3.2000 and the said copy was handed over by the deponent to the appellant on 27.3.2000.