SHRIRAM CHITS TAMILNADU PRIVATE LTD Vs. D MURUGESAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Appeal has been filed against the order dated 14-07-2014 passed by the Tamilnadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Madurai Bench (hereinafter referred to as, 'the State Commission') whereby the Complaint filed by the Appellant herein was dismissed on the ground of delay of 730 days has not been satisfactorily explained.

(2.) We have heard Mr. K. V. Ananthakrishnan, Learned Counsel for the Appellant and have perused the impugned order passed by the State Commission. The Learned Counsel submitted that in the affidavit filed seeking condonation of delay, the Appellant had given sufficient reasons to show as to why the Appellant could not prefer the Complaint within the time provided under Sec. 24A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act'). A perusal of the paragraphs 4, 5, 6, 7, & 8 of the affidavit which have been reproduced below for ready reference establishes the fact that the Appellant was pursuing taking of steps for redressal of his grievances and as the Opposite Party is an advocate who had committed breach of trust, more caution was required which it took and, therefore, the delay of 730 days in approaching the State Commission by filing the Complaint ought to have been condoned.

(3.) The reasons given by the Appellant are satisfactory and the explanation appears to be bona fide. The State Commission, in our considered opinion, ought to have condoned the delay of 730 days in filing the Complaint and the Complaint should have been decided on merits.