AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
V.K. Jain, Presiding Member
IA/16784/2018 (For c/delay)
This is an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The impugned order was passed on 02.07.2018 and this appeal has been instituted on 06.09.2018. Assuming that the copy of the impugned order was received by the appellant on the very same date, on which it was passed, there was a delay of 36 days in the institution of the appeal. I have perused the supplementary affidavit filed by Mr. Vinay Yadav, counsel for the appellant. Para 6 to 8 of the affidavit read as under:
That the deponent is only son of his father and looks after his entire family and he remained busy in the rituals of his father till 15.07.2018.
That due sudden demise of the father, deponent being only son has to look after his mother who is also suffering from various old age ailments remained preoccupied in the urgent work till the last week of the August 2018.
I say that the deponent was not proper state of mind due to sudden demise of his father and therefore could not give proper attention to his profession commitment and therefore delays has occurred in the filing of the present appeal.
I am satisfied from the reasons given hereinabove for the delay in filing an appeal which is otherwise a small delay, cannot be said to be deliberate or contumacious. The said delay is therefore, condoned. The application stands disposed of.
FA/1605/2018
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
This is an appeal directed against the order of the State Commission dated 02.07.2018 whereby the Consumer Complaint instituted by him was dismissed in default, no one having appeared for him on the date the complaint was dismissed.
A perusal of the affidavit filed by the counsel for the complainant/appellant would show that on 02.07.2019, when the Consumer Complaint came to be dismissed in default, the father of the counsel had collapsed in the bank where he had gone in connection with his pension account. As a result, the counsel had to take his father to Ramjas Hospital, his father having suffered a severe cardiac arrest.
From the affidavit of the counsel, I am satisfied that the absence of the appellant/complainant before the State Commission on 02.07.2018 was bonafide and not on account of any deliberate act or omission on his part. The impugned order is therefore, set aside and the Consumer Complaint is restored to the file of the State Commission. The parties are directed to appear before the State Commission on 19.02.2020. On that date, the State Commission shall proceed to decide the Consumer Complaint instituted by the complainant in accordance with law.