Golden Trust Financial Services and anr. Vs. Secretary, State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
.....assurance co. ltd. v smt rita devi, 1997(2) glt 406, approved. new india assurance co. ltd. v birendra mohan de, 1995 (2) gau lt 218 (db) and union of india v smt gita banik, 1996 (2) glt 246, are not good law]. - provided that the state commission may entertain an appeal after expiry of the said period of 30 days if it is satisfied that there is sufficient cause for not filing it within that period......who is appellant in the instant case has been directed to deposit rs. 25,000/- after which the delay condonation petition and the matter of admission would be taken up. therefore, petitioner moved another application for recalling the order which was also rejected holding that no justification was found to recall the order.2. section 15 of the consumer protection act, 1986 are quoted as under:any person aggrieved by an order made by the district forum may prefer an appeal against such order to the state commission within a period of 30 days from the date of the order, in such form and manner as may be prescribed.provided that the state commission may entertain an appeal after expiry of the said period of 30 days if it is satisfied that there is sufficient cause for not filing it.....

Judgment:
ORDER

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. Standing Counsel.

This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 29.1.2008 and 26.2.2008 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Orissa, Cuttack in F.A. No. 57 of 2008 by which the petitioner who is appellant in the instant case has been directed to deposit Rs. 25,000/- after which the delay condonation petition and the matter of admission would be taken up. Therefore, petitioner moved another application for recalling the order which was also rejected holding that no justification was found to recall the order.

2. Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 are quoted as under:

Any person aggrieved by an order made by the District Forum may prefer an appeal against such order to the State Commission within a period of 30 days from the date of the order, in such form and manner as may be prescribed.

Provided that the State Commission may entertain an Appeal after expiry of the said period of 30 days if it is satisfied that there is sufficient cause for not filing it within that period.

Provided further that no appeal by a person, who is required to pay any amount in terms of an order of the District Forum, shall be entertained by the State Commission unless the Appellant has deposited in the prescribed manner 50% of the amount of Rs. 25,000/- which ever is less.

The petitioner in the instant writ petition deposited Rs. 25,000/-by way of Demand Draft dated 26.12.2007 at the time of filing the appeal. Therefore, in our opinion, the petitioner has fulfilled the statutory requirement and therefore, it was not proper on the part of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Orissa, Cuttack to direct the appellant to deposit Rs. 25,000/- more and on that condition only, the delay condonation petition would be heard.

3. Therefore, we quash the impugned order dated 29.1.2008 and 26.2.2008 and allow the writ petition accordingly with the direction that the State Commission shall verify if the petitioner has already deposited Rs. 25,000/-. Besides, the statutory amount of Rs. 25,000/-, he shall not be insisted to deposit any more amount for the purpose of considering the delay condonation application or entertaining the appeal.

U.C.C. be granted as per rules.