LUKNOW DEVLOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. RAM KRISHNA DIXIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Mukesh Verma, Advocate, for the appellant and Mr. Amit Kumar Dixit, Advocate, for the respondent.

(2.) The opposite party has filed above appeal from the order of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.P. dtd. 22/11/2023 passed in CC/11/2002 and CC/6/2011, directing the appellant to pay interest @12% per annum on Rs.178783.00, deposited by the respondent from the date of respective deposit till the date of payment, within 30 days, failing which, interest would be payable @15% per annum; pay damages at the rate of Rs.50.00 per day from the date of first allotment dtd. 5/10/1990 till 6/6/2015 the date of giving possession; pay compensation of Rs.One lac with interest @12% per annum from 5/10/1990 till 6/6/2015, within 30 days, failing which, interest would be payable @15% per annum; charge an amount of Rs.425000/- and not Rs.1158000/-, as the cost of the flat allotted to the complainant and refund excess amount within 30 days, failing which, interest would be payable @12% per annum; withdraw demand notice dtd. 24/12/2001 and also withdraw the amount of interest raised against allotment letter dtd. 5/10/1990; pay Rs.20/- lacs with interest @12% per annum from 5/10/1990 till 6/6/2015, within 30 days, failing which, interest would be payable @15% per annum, for deficiency in service; pay Rs.15000/- per month from 5/10/1990 till 6/6/2015, within 30 days, failing which, interest would be payable @15% per annum from 5/10/1990, as compensation for loss of rent.

(3.) The office has submitted report that the appeal has been filed with delay of 180 days. The appellant has filed IA/9810/2024, for condoning the delay in filing the appeal. The appellant stated that the counsel appearing before State Commission had sent the copy of the order dtd. 22/11/2023 to the law Sec. on 25/11/2023. Law Sec. informed the Estate Branch on 30/11/2023. Vice Chairman appointed Mr. Mukesh Verma, Advocate on 24/1/2024, for filing the appeal. The concerned officer signed the vakalatnama on 30/1/2024. The concerned officer handed over the papers and vakalatnama to the Advocate on 2/5/2024. Then the appeal, application etc. were drafted and filed on 19/6/2024. The respondent has filed his reply/objection to the delay condonation and stated that certified copy of the impugned order was received to the law Sec. on 25/11/2023. Law Sec. did not show due diligence in filing the appeal. There is absolutely no explanation for the delay from 30/1/2024 till 2/5/2024. Although the affidavit has been sworn on 3/5/2024 but the appeal has been filed on 19/6/2024 and there is no explanation for the delay during this period. Sec. 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 provides 30 days limitation for filing the appeal. Delay condonation application is liable to be rejected and the appeal be dismissed as time barred.