LUDHIANA IMPROVEMENT TRUST vs Nirmaljit Kaur

THESE are a set of three appeals filed by Ludhiana Improvement Trust against the judgment of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, UT of Chandigarh, in CC Nos. 26-28 of 2005. On 6.9.2011, when the matter was taken up, no one was present for the parties. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed. Subsequently, the following order was passed by this Commission on 3.11.2011-- We have heard learned counsel for the parties. Accord to learned counsel for the applicants, wrong date was noted down and therefore the appeal could not be attended on the schedule date. The counsel for the applicants, therefore, seeks restoration of the appeal. We allow the request on condition that the appellant will deposit Rs.3,000/- in each of the matter in the Consumer Legal Aid Account. If the amount is so paid within four weeks, the matters be listed for admission hearing on 07-12-2011.

ACCORDINGLY, the matter was taken up on 7.12.2011 and the two counsels were heard on admission. The impugned common-order was passed by the State Commission on 30.7.2007. The three appeals against the same were filed in this Commission on 11.2.2011 i.e. after a long gap of over three and half years. Learned counsel for the respondents objected to admission of the appeals on the ground of inordinate delay of nearly 1280 days. He also argued that the application for condonation of delay does not even mention the number of days of delay. It merely seeks condonation on the ground that the delay was caused due to various channels for obtaining sanction and for necessary instructions for filing the present appeal and thus the delay is so caused is not intentional but due to interdepartmental procedure. During arguments on delay, the counsel for the appellant accepted that there was a delay of about 1280 days in filing the appeals, though not specifically mentioned in the application seeking condonation. The counsel also submitted an affidavit of 6.12.2011 from Shri Avtar Singh Azad, Executive Officer Ludhiana Improvement Trust. This is submitted as additional affidavit on condonation of delay. Para 4 of the affidavit of Shri Avtar Singh Azad reads as follows:- That the deponent further states before the Honble Tribunal that the delay of 1280 days in filing of the present appeal is absolutely unintentionally and without any malafides, as is evident from the fact that necessary show cause notices have been issued to delinquent officials of the Trust who were unable to protect the interest of the Improvement Trust in the present case and proceedings in consequence of these show cause notices are going on. The copy of the show cause notices issued by the Improvement Trust to the delinquent officials seeking explanation for the delay caused in the present case are annexed as Annexure A-1 respectively.

However, what was submitted by the appellant counsel, with the above affidavit, is only a copy of the Memo No.LIT/6366-67-68 dated 17.12.2010 issued to the three officials of the applicant trust, allegedly responsible for this delay in filing the appeals. The notice gave them ten days time to explain their conduct failing which action was threatened against them. However, nothing is placed on record to show what further action followed against them between the above mentioned memo of 17.12.2010 and the additional affidavit of 6.12.2011 i.e. in the period of 12 months.

FROM the above averment in the affidavit of Sri Avtar Singh Azad, it is clear that the appellant Trust must have come to know about the non-filing of appeal, sufficiently before the memo of 17.12.2010. But there is no explanation why the trust waited till 11.2.2011 to actually file it. In view of the above, Shri Avtar Singh Azad, Executive Officer Ludhiana Improvement Trust is directed to be personally present in this Commission on the next date of hearing and explain the gaps in the affidavits for condonation of delay of 1280 days. Issue fresh notices for 13.3.2012.