ELDECO INFRASTRUCTURE & PROPERTIES Vs. MUKESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Case is taken up on this application, requesting that on the previous date i.e. 29.04.2019, the Bench was on leave and the Court Master has given the date of 07.01.2020 for admission of the matter. It is requested that matter be heard. Accordingly, application is allowed and matter is heard.

(2.) We have heard the arguments and have perused the record.

(3.) The principle of law is clear that it is the abundant duty of applicant to explain the delay of each and every date by sufficient reasons. Admittedly, the period of limitation for filing the appeal is 30 days under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Admittedly, the appellant had received the copy of the order on 15.9.2018 and as such the period of limitation had thus expired on 14.10.2018. They issued first letter to the respondent offering alternate unit to him only on 23.10.2018 i.e. after the expiry of period of limitation. Their contention is that they were negotiating with the respondent for the alternate accommodation. This cannot be sufficient grounds for condonation of delay. Sufficient grounds could be such which prevented them from filing the present appeal and there is no reason shown in the application for condoning the delay which occurred between 15.09.2018 to 23.10.2018 before they wrote a letter to the respondent. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that condonation of delay is not a matter of right and where sufficient cause is not shown, the Courts are within their jurisdiction to dismiss the application. It has been so held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ram Lal and Ors. Vs. Rewa Coalfields Limited, 1962 AIR(SC) 361 as under: