Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... the honble apex court has also observed in the case titled state of nagaland vs lipokan and others reported in 2005 (2) rcr (criminal), 414 that proof of sufficient cause is a condition precedent for exercise of discretion by the court in condoning scc ..... it is also apposite to observe that while deciding an application filed in such cases for condonation of delay, the court has to keep in mind that the special period of limitation has been prescribed under the consumer protection act, 1986 for filingappeals and revisions in consumer matters and the object of expeditious adjudication of the consumer disputes will get defeated if this court was to entertain highly belated petitions filed against the orders of the ..... the district consumer disputes redressal forum, rewari (in short, the district forum) vide their order dated 31.05.2011 stated that the respondent had got the re-enrollment of this plot as back as on 16.11.2006 and he has been waiting for a roof of his own on his head which has been wrongfully denied by the opposite ..... instead of remedying the wrong, by complying with the decision of the consumer fora, the improvement trust is trying to brazen out its illegal act by contending that the allottee should have protested when it illegally laid the road in his plot. ..... , air 1962 supreme court 361, it has been observed; it is, however, necessary to emphasize that even after sufficient cause has been shown a party is not entitled to the condonation of delay in question as a matter of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... it is also apposite to observe that while deciding an application filed in such cases for condonation of delay, the court has to keep in mind that the special period of limitation has been prescribed under the consumer protection act, 1986 for filing appeals and revisions in consumer matters and the object of expeditious adjudication of the consumer disputes will get defeated if this court was to entertain highly belated petitions filed against the orders ..... authorityiv (2011) cpj 63 (sc)has held that while deciding the application filed for condonation of delay, the court has to keep in mind that the special period of limitation has been prescribed under the act for filing appeals and revisions in consumer matters and the object of expeditious adjudication of the consumer disputes will get defeated if the appeals and revisions which are highly belated are entertained. ..... 'ble apex courtalso observed in case state of nagaland vs. ..... 11.statecommission, while dismissing the application for condonaton of delay of 128 days, in its impugned order observed; it is stated on behalf of applicant/appellant that copy of the impugned order dated 06/12/2008 was received by it on 29/12/2008 and thereafter, the applicant which is finance company entrusted the papers to its employee ..... , air 1962 supreme court 361, it has been observed; it is, however, necessary to emphasize that even after sufficient cause has been shown a party is not entitled to the condonation of delay in question as a matter of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... observe that while deciding an application filed in such cases for condonation of delay, the court has to keep in mind that the special period of limitation has been prescribed under the consumer protection act, 1986 for filing appeals and revisions in consumer matters and the object of expeditious adjudication of the consumer disputes will get defeated if this court was to entertain highly belated petitions filed against the ..... (sc)has held that while deciding the application filed for condonation of delay, the court has to keep in mind that the special period of limitation has been prescribed under the act for filing appeals and revisions in consumer matters and the object of expeditious adjudication of the consumer disputes will get defeated if the appeals and revisions which are highly belated are entertained. ..... case state of nagaland vs. ..... application for condonation of delay in its impugned order observed; as such, the applicant/appellant, acted in a highly irresponsible and negligent manner, and woke up from their deep slumber, after ..... has been filed under section 21(b) of consumer protection act, 1986 (for short, act) challenging impugned order dated 5.2.2013, passed by state consumer disputes redressal commission, ut chandigarh (for short, state commission). 2. ..... respondent/complainant filed a consumer complaint under section 12 of the act, before district consumer disputes redressal forum, chandigarh (for short, district forum) on the allegations that he had availed a loan .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... court has also observed in case titled state of nagaland v. ..... in filing the appeal is neither willful nor wanton but only due to the reasons stated above and the appellant has taken steps immediately upon getting knowledge or order against it ..... ii (2012) cpj 314 (nc), this commission while dealing with section 24-a of the consumer protection act, 1986, has held; the expression sufficient cause has not been defined in the act, rightly so, as it would vary from facts and circumstances of each case. ..... order of district forum, petitioner filed an appeal before the state commission, which dismissed the same vide impugned order. ..... short question which arises for consideration is as to whether state commission was justified in not condoning the delay of 278 days in filing of the appeal ..... has been filed under section 21(b) of the consumer protection act, 1986 (for short as act) challenging order dated 21.3.2011 passed by a.p. ..... the o.p.2 hospital in their counter categorically stated that the deceased was not treated in their hospital previously and for the 1st time she was admitted in their ..... therefore, the ground stated in the application cannot constitute sufficient cause so as to condone the delay in filing the appeal as prayed for in the application from the side ..... that there is no intentional delay on part of the appellant as the appellant had not received the order copy directly from the consumer forum which is required to be sent under the provision of the consumer protection act?. 12. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... is also apposite to observe that while deciding an application filed in such cases for condonation of delay, the court has to keep in mind that the special period of limitation has been prescribed under the consumer protection act, 1986 for filing appeals and revisions in consumer matters and the object of expeditious adjudication of the consumer disputes will get defeated if this court was to entertain highly belated petitions filed against the orders ..... iv (2011) cpj 63 (sc)has held that while deciding the application filed for condonation of delay, the court has to keep in mind that the special period of limitation has been prescribed under the act for filing appeals and revisions in consumer matters and the object of expeditious adjudication of the consumer disputes will get defeated if the appeals and revisions which are highly belated are entertained. ..... apex courtalso observed in case state of nagaland vs. ..... by the order of district forum, respondent no.1 filed appeal before the state commission which allowed the same, vide impugned order. 6. ..... though petitioners in their application have stated that there is delay of 26 days but as per office report there is delay of 124 days ..... under the consumer protection act, 1986, a special period of limitation has been provided to ensure expeditious disposal ..... member petitioners/complainants have challenged impugned order dated 27.9.2010 passed by state consumer disputes redressal commission, chennai (for short, state commission). 2. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... apposite to observe that while deciding an application filed in such cases for condonation of delay, the court has to keep in mind that the special period of limitation has been prescribed under the consumer protection act, 1986 for filing appeals and revisions in consumer matters and the object of expeditious adjudication of the consumer disputes will get defeated if this court was to entertain highly belated petitions filed against the orders ..... 2011) cpj 63 (sc)has held that while deciding the application filed for condonation of delay, the court has to keep in mind that the special period of limitation has been prescribed under the act for filing appeals and revisions in consumer matters and the object of expeditious adjudication of the consumer disputes will get defeated if the appeals and revisions which are highly belated are entertained. ..... courtalso observed in case state of nagaland vs. ..... being aggrieved by order dated 29.3.2012, passed by madhya pradesh state consumer disputes redressal commission, bhopal (for short, state commission) petitioner/complainant has filed this revision petition. 2. ..... being aggrieved, respondents filed appeal before the state commission which accepted the same and set aside the order of district forum, observing as under; on the basis of foregoing discussions we come to the conclusion that on 29.5.2007 when the respondent first time ..... under the consumer protection act, 1986, a special period of limitation has been provided to ensure expeditious .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... honble apex court has also observed in case titled state of nagaland v. ..... devi, ii (2012) cpj 314 (nc), this commission while dealing with section 24a of the consumer protection act, 1986, has held: the expression sufficient cause has not been defined in the act, rightly so, as it would vary from facts and circumstances of each case. ..... in the case in hand, in the application for condonation of delay, it is nowhere stated as to when the certified copy was received by the appellant, when the same was sent to the corporate office for approval and when approval ..... the present case belongs to the state of maharashtra and the appellant collected the certified copy of the impugned order passed by the honble state commission, maharashtra on 29.11.2011.? 10 ..... in absence of such evidence, it cannot be stated that the site of the accident, which is a marshy land is covered by high tide level and high tide sea water actually entered ..... therefore, the ground stated in the application cannot constitute sufficient cause so as to condone the delay in filing the appeal as prayed for in the application from the side of the ..... in entire application, it is nowhere stated as to when certified copy of the impugned order was obtained by the appellant, on which date it was sent to the corporate office for approval and on which date approval ..... of present appeal, appellant has challenged impugned order dated 27.9.2011, passed by state consumer disputes redressal commission, mumbai (for short as state commission). 2. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... the honble apoex court has also observed in case titled state of nagaland vs. ..... gupta, presiding member present revision petition has been filed under section 21(b) of the consumer protection act, 1986 (for short as act) against order dated 22.12.2011, passed by haryana state consumer disputes redressal commission, panchkula (for short as state commission), in which following prayers have been made ; a) set aside the impugned order dated 22.12.2011 passed by learned state commission haryana at panchkula in revision petition no. ..... be that as it may, district consumer disputes redressal forum, rohtak ( district forum ) vide its order dated 27.08.2009, allowed the complaint of respondent no.1/complainant, filed under section 12 of the act and passed the following directions; in these circumstances, we hereby allow the complaint with direction to the opposite parties no. ..... therefore, as per the requirement of section 15 of the consumer protection act, 1986, only appeal is maintainable before this commission and not this revision petition. ..... filing of revision petition challenging order under section 21(b) of the act as well as under section 27-a of the act, at the same time is not maintainable. 12. ..... ex-facie, prayers sought for by petitioner seeking quashing of order dated 7.9.2011, passed by district forum in execution proceedings, is not maintainable in this revision, since appeal lie under section 27-a of the act, against any order passed in the execution proceedings. 3. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... it is also apposite to observe that while deciding an application filed in such cases for condonation of delay, the court has to keep in mind that the special period of limitation has been prescribed under the consumer protection act, 1986 for filing appeals and revisions in consumer matters and the object of expeditious adjudication of the consumer disputes will get defeated if this court was to entertain highly belated petitions filed against the orders ..... the petitioner has placed reliance on three authorities reported in state of nagaland vs. ..... the petitioner has failed to explain the delay in filing the appeal before the state commission as well as this revision petition before this commission. ..... i do not find any such sufficient cause stated in the application and no such interference in the impugned order is called for. 12. ..... she however, submitted that the order of the state commission has already been complied with. ..... it is also clear that while considering the petition filed under section 5 of the limitation act, the court has to examine the following aspects:- 1. ..... alas, the department pursued the matter in a lackadaisical manner, took the same plea, which was rejected by the state commission in its order. 8. ..... , air 1962 supreme court 361, it has been observed that it is, however, necessary to emphasize that even after sufficient cause has been shown a party is not entitled to the condonation of delay in question as a matter of right. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... it is also apposite to observe that while deciding an application filed in such cases for condonation of delay, the court has to keep in mind that the special period of limitation has been prescribed under the consumer protection act, 1986 for filing appeals and revisions in consumer matters and the object of expeditious adjudication of the consumer disputes will get defeated if this court was to entertain highly belated petitions filed against the orders ..... it was also argued that the honble supreme court has laid down a liberal view for condonation of delay in the case of state of nagaland vs. ..... 1166 of 2006), decided by the apex court on 08.07.2010 it was held: the party should show that besides acting bona fide, it had taken all possible steps within its power and control and had approached the court without any unnecessary delay ..... commissioner and others air 1977 supreme court 1221 held, section 5 of the limitation act is a hard task-master and judicial interpretation has encased it within a narrow compass. ..... was also argued that if the delay is not condoned, it will cause loss and irreparable injury to the bihar state electricity board and public interest will suffer in the ultimate analysis. 4. ..... be erased from section 5 of the limitation act by adopting excessive liberal approach, which would defeat the very purpose of section 5 of limitation act. ..... is now well settled that departmental and procedural delays do not form a sufficient ground under section 5 of the limitation act. .....
Tag this Judgment!