S.M. Shembole, Presiding Judicial Member:
1. This is an application for condonation of delay of 74 days which was caused in preferring appeal against the judgment and order dated 12.12.2013 passed by District Consumer Forum, Jalgaon partly allowing consumer complaint No. 53/2009.
2. We heard counsel for both side and perused the application under order. We have also perused the copy of impugned judgment and order and also the copies of complaint, written version and other documents.
3. It is submitted by Shri. S. B. Yawalkar, learned counsel appearing for the applicant that though the impugned judgment and order was passed on 12.12.2013 the appellant was not aware about the same. The appellant came to know about passing impugned judgment and order dated 12.12.2013 on 17.03.2013 when it received the copy of notice along with the copy of impugned judgment and order from the complainant which was sent by complainant by post. Thereafter the applicant received certified copy of impugned judgment and order from office of Forum and filed the appeal on 26.03.2014. According to Mr. Yawalkar in fact there was no delay in filing the appeal as the appeal is filed within 30 days from the date of knowledge. However by way of precaution the applicant has filed this application under order. But we find little force in the submission of Adv. Yawalkar. Because on perusal of copy of impugned judgment and order it manifests that the appellant was represented by Adv. B. B. Chaudhary and the impugned judgment and order passed in presence of the counsel for both side. Therefore it cannot be accepted that the appellant was not aware about the date of passing the impugned judgment and order.
4. Moreover, the copy of impugned judgment and order further reflects that on 24.12.2013 the copies of impugned judgment and order were sent to the parties by the office of District Consumer Forum, Jalgaon. However it is submitted by Adv. Yawalkar that no copy if any sent by District Consumer Forum to the parties is received to the appellant. However he has fairly conceded that the postal address of the appellant shown in the appeal memo as well as in the complaint and copy of impugned judgment and order is correct and on the same address the appellant has received the complaint notice etc. Therefore it cannot be accepted that the appellant has not received the copy of impugned judgment and order which was sent by the office of District Consumer Forum, Jalgaon. When the copy of impugned judgment and order was sent to the parties by post on 24.12.2013 vide outward No.261813 it will have to presumed that the complainant as well as the respondent have received the copies within 6-7 days. Therefore on any count it is obvious that the appellant has received the copy of impugned judgment and order on or before 31.12.2013. Thus on any count the submission of Shri. Yawalkar, learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was not aware about the date of passing the impugned judgment and order cannot be sustained. It is also supported by Shri. Vijay Y. Patil, learned counsel appearing for the respondent and submitted that the copy of impugned judgment and order which was sent by the office of the District Consumer Forum, Jalgaon is received to the complainant/respondent No.1.
5. For the foregoing reasons when the applicant/appellant would have received the copy of impugned judgment and order on or before 31.12.2013, he should have filed the appeal on or before 30.01.2014. But he has filed the appeal on 26.03.2014. Therefore it is obvious that there was more than 54 days delay in filing the appeal, though applicant has shown in the application under order as 73 days delay.
6. Now let us proceed to consider whether there is any reasonable ground to condone such inordinate delay of more than 54 days. It is submitted by Shri. Yawalkar, learned counsel for the applicant that as the applicant has not received copy of impugned judgment and order he was not was aware about the date of passing the impugned judgment and order till receipt of the notice with copies of impugned judgment and order which was sent by complainant on 17.03.2013, there was such delay etc. But as already discussed above since the applicant was represented by his counsel before the District Consumer Forum the same cannot be considered. It is also submitted by Shri Vijay Y. Patil, learned counsel for the complainant/respondent No.1 that there is no just and reasonable ground to condone such delay as the appellant was well aware about passing the impugned judgment and order etc. Since the applicant/appellant was represented by his counsel before the District Consumer Forum and further the copy of the impugned judgment and order was sent to the complainant as well as opponents by the office of District Consumer Forum, on 24.12.2013. We find much force in the submission of Mr. Vijay Y. Patil, advocate for the respondent.
7. Thus we find no just and reasonable ground to condone such inordinate delay. On perusal of the copy of impugned judgment and order we also do not find any legal point involved in the appeal so as to condone such inordinate delay. Therefore we are declined to condone such inordinate delay and hence the following order.
ORDER
1. An application for condonation of delay is dismissed.
2. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed.
3. No order as to cost.