LLOYDS FINANCE LIMITED vs ANURAG AGARWAL

-THESE appeals under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 are directed against the orders of District Consumer Redressal Forum, Raipur (hereinafter called the ''District Forum'' for short) in complaints as per details given below: All these appeals have been filed on 22.12.2003, as such, the same are belated and in each appeal, application for condonation of delay has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and an affidavit of Sri Pradeep Kumar Naik, Branch Manager has also been filed. Since the application and affidavit filed in each appeal are identical, the application for condonation of delay filed in the aforesaid appeals are being disposed of by this common order.

IT is stated in the application that the delay in filing appeal was due to the reason that the envelope containing certified copies and relevant papers was misplaced at Indore Office. IT is further stated that offices of the appellant are located at Mumbai, Ahmedabad and Indore and before taking decision the files move from one place to another also. IT has been prayed that as the delay is bona fide and genuine the same be condoned in the interest of justice. Only in two of the aforesaid appeals i.e., Appeal No. 1307/03 and Appeal No. 1311/03 reply to the application has been filed. However, all the learned Counsel present for various respondents vehemently opposed the application orally and stated that there was no sufficient cause for delay in filing the aforesaid appeals and the application deserves to be dismissed.

Heard the learned Counsel for both the parties and perused the record. The learned Counsel for the appellant placed reliance on State of West Bengal v. Administrator, Howrah Municipality, AIR 1972 SC 749.

IT is observed that the application under consideration is very cryptic. IT is simply stated in very generalized terms in the application that the envelope containing certified copies and relevant papers was misplaced at Indore Office and also that the offices of the appellant are located at Mumbai, Ahmedabad and Indore and before taking decision the files move from one place to another also. However, the appellant has failed to state as to when the certified copy was received by the Counsel for the appellant, when the same was handed over at the appellant''s office at Raipur, when the relevant papers were sent by the Raipur Office to other offices of the appellant, when the papers were sent to Indore Office where the same were misplaced. IT has also not been mentioned in the application as to whom the same papers were sent. Such vague contentions as made by the appellant cannot be accepted. The affidavit of Shri Pradeep Kumar Naik, Branch Manager is also very cryptic. It appears that the affidavit has been filed in support of the appeal. However, it is stated in para 3 of the said affidavit that ''the said file was misplaced in the office. It has been traced today, hence the appeal is preferred. As such delay be condoned in the interest of justice''. We are of the opinion that such a generalised statement cannot afford sufficient ground for condoning the delay. It is settled law that unless there is good and sufficient cause for the same, the delay cannot be condoned.

IN our opinion, the appellant has utterly failed to put forth any just and sufficient cause for the delay in filing these appeals and in the absence of just and sufficient cause State of West Bengal v. Administrator, Howrah Municipality (supra), would render no help to the appellant. Hence, the application for condonation of delay is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal also stands dismissed. The appellant shall bear their own cost of appeal and also pay that of the respondent which is quantified at Rs. 1,000/-. (Rupees one thousand) only. Appeals dismissed.