CourtKutchehry.com
Tribunals and Commissions(2001) 09 NCDRC CK 0027

Corporation of the City of Belgaum vs SIDDANGOUDA ANNAPPAGOUDA PATIL

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 28 September 2001 · Citation: 2007 4 CPJ 166

HON’BLE JUDGES
D.P.Wadhwa , C.L.Chaudhry , J.K.Mehra , Rajyalakshmi Rao , B.K.Taimni J.
RESULT
Revision Petition dismissed

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 343 words
1.

PETITIONER-Corporation of the City of Belgaum is aggrieved by the order of the State Commission dismissing its appeal which was barred by 173 days. State Commission held that there was no sufficient cause to condone the abnormal delay of 173 days.

2.

APPEAL by the petitioner had arisen against an award of Rs. 2,50,000 against the petitioner given as compensation for the death of the son of the complainant-respondents, in the swimming pool maintained by the petitioner. Complainants'' son Sanjeev was member of the Belgaum Aquatic Club. Club was making use of swimming pool belonging to the petitioner. Son of the complainants was taking swimming classes. On 11.10.1992 he went to the swimming pool at about 4.00 p.m. and was drowned. It would appear that no body knew. When he did not return parents went to swimming pool on the following day and they were told by the officer of the petitioner who was incharge of the swimming pool that the boy had left the swimming pool on 10.10.1992 itself. Parents even went to the Police Station and lodged a report regarding the missing of their son Sanjeev. However, dead body of Sanjeev was picked out of the swimming pool. Complaining deficiency in service, complainants filed complaint before the District Forum against the petitioner as well as Belgaum Aquatic Club represented by its President and Secretary. After considering the pleadings and evidence on record, District Forum awarded Rs. 2,50,000 as compensation holding that there was deficiency in service by the petitioner and Belgaum Aquatic Club in not properly maintaining the swimming pool and offering proper services for the training. Complainants were also awarded cost of Rs. 500. All the opposite parties were held jointly and severally responsible.

Aggrieved, only the petitioner appealed to the State Commission which as noted above, dismissed the appeal as it was barred by limitation. We do not find it is a fit case for us to exercise our jurisdiction under Clause (b) of Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act. This revision petition is dismissed. R.P. dismissed.