Tribunals and Commissions(1991) 06 NCDRC CK 0029

LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY-/Opp. Party vs SHARAD CHANDRA

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 4 June 1991 · Citation: 1991 0 CPC 497 : 1991 0 CPC 525 : 1991 2 CPR 118 : 1991 2 CPR 64 : 1992 2 CPJ 500 : 1993 1 CLT 194

HON’BLE JUDGES
V.Balakrishna Eradi , A.S.Vijayakar , Y.Krishan J.
RESULT
Appeal 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

2 paragraphs · 192 words
1.

- IT is brought to our notice that this appeal has been filed after a day of about 40 days, no valid or satisfactory explanation whatever is forthcoming from the appellant for the said long delay. An application for condonation of delay has been filed with the appeal. This application is supported by an affidavit sworn to by a clerk of the appellant''s advocate in Delhi. The deponent of the affidavit could not have had any personal knowledge whatever of the facts sworn to by him in the affidavit. In the circumstances this affidavit is absolutely of no value. If the appellant was really serious about moving this Commission for condonation of the delay in Institution of the appeal it should have filed an affidavit sworn to by a responsible officer belonging to its establishment who is personally acquainted with the relevant facts. This not having been done, we are constrained to hold that the delay remains totally unexplained and hence the request for condonation cannot be granted.

2.

THE application for condonation of the delay will accordingly stand dismissed and in consequence the appeal also will stand rejected. Appeal dismissed.