AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THIS is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 1.5.1998 passed by District Consumer Forum, Bahraich in Complaint Case No. 432/1997.
IT is not necessary for us to give the facts of the case as the question of limitation is involved as according to the respondent the appeal has been filed very much after the expiry of limitation. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
Learned Counsel for the appellant has argued on the application for condonation of delay, it has been mentioned that the judgment was delivered on 1.5.1998 and a certificate copy was obtained by the learned Counsel for the appellant on 22.6.1998. This copy of judgment was sent to the appellant No. 2 with letter dated 18.7.1998. It was received in the office of the appellant No. 2 on 4.8.1998. After the copy was received, it was sent to appellant No. 1 for necessary action on 22.8.1998. It was then sent to the office and was received there in the first week of November, 1998. Thereafter the file was misplaced in the office with some other files and was traced out in the last week of May, 1999. Thereafter the judgment alongwith the file was sent to the Counsel for filing an appeal before this Commission. After the file was received in the last week of May, 1999 the appellant''s Counsel prepared the present appeal for filing the same but unfortunately during summer vacation on account of the shifting of the office, the file was again misplaced and it could be traced out only on 5.12.1999. Thereafter the appeal was prepared and filed. According to learned Counsel this delay is genuine and should be condoned. Even from the facts given in the application, the appeal is highly barred by time and sufficient explanation has not been given for not filing the appeal in time.
NO affidavit has been filed alongwith this application for condonation of delay. Mere application without supporting it by an affidavit cannot be relied upon. The allegations contained in the application of such a nature should have been supported by an affidavit on oath. Now we scrutinize these facts. The copy of the judgment was received by appellant No. 2 on 4.8.1998. When copy of the judgment was received on 4.8.1998 then it should have been immediately sent to appellant No. 2 at Faizabad but it was sent on 22.8.1998 for necessary action. When the file was received in the first week of September, 1998 then the appeal should have been filed immediately, but it is alleged that the file was misplaced in the office. It has not been mentioned on which date this file was misplaced in the office and on which date it was found. This fact has not been supported by any affidavit of the person who was dealing with this file. In the absence of any such affidavit it cannot be said that the facts indicated in the application about the missing of the file for some time cannot be believed. Thereafter it has further been mentioned that when the file was found it was sent to Advocate for preparing the appeal. There also the file was misplaced and was traced out on 5.12.1999. There is no affidavit either of the Advocate or his Clerk to support this allegation. In the absence of any evidence on this point, no reliance can be placed on the mere allegations in this application.
THUS we find that the appellant has utterly failed to prove and justify that the appeal could not be filed for sufficient grounds within time of limitation. The period of limitation is only 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. The copy of the judgment was received on 4.8.1998 and the appeal was filed on 6.12.1999 after a lapse of about one year three months. As no sufficient cause has been shown for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, the same is liable to be dismissed as barred by limitation. The appeal is, therefore, liable to be dismissed on the point of limitation. ORDER The appeal is dismissed, and the judgment and order of the learned District Forum are confirmed. Let copy as per rules be made available to the parties. Appeal dismissed.