MANOJ SHARMA Vs. AHATESHAM AHEMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been field against the order dated 28.6.2019 whereby the appeal No.350/2019 filed by the petitioner against the order of District Forum dated 25.1.2019 was dismissed on the ground that the appeal was barred by time as there was a delay of 66 days in filing the appeal and that the appellant had failed to give the sufficient reasons for condonation of delay.

(2.) It is submitted that the order is illegal and is liable to the set aside on the ground that the medical certificate which was filed by the appellant was not considered. It is further argued that on merit the petitioner has a good case since the complaint was barred by limitation and that the petitioner was always ready to refund the money which was deposited by the respondent/complainant.

(3.) I have heard the arguments and perused the record. It is a settled proposition of law that condonation of delay is not a matter of right. No doubt a lenient view is required to be taken while considering the application for condonation of delay, but each case depends on its own facts. In the present case as argued by learned counsel, the petitioner had been attending the proceedings before the District Forum yet it did not file any affidavit of evidence in support of his contention. The finding of the District Forum, therefore, is based on uncontroverted testimony of the respondents/complainants. As regards the limitation in filing the complaint was concerned, the facts shows that the respondents deposited certain money with the petitioner for raising construction on a plot and no construction was raised by the petitioner, hence the period of limitation was continuing one and did not get extinguished at any point of time. The argument, therefore, that the complaint was barred by limitation is meritless.