Recently, the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Thiruvananthapuram bench, comprising of Ajith Kumar, Beena Kumary, and Radhakrishnan K.R., refused to condone a delay of 2,279 days in filing of an appeal and held that condonation of delay could not be claimed as a matter of right. 50,000 as compensation for the deficient service to the Mr Jayagopal K.. Aggrieved …
The New Delhi bench of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, comprising Justice Deepa Sharma as the Presiding Member, emphasized that condonation of delay is not an inherent right but necessitates the person seeking it to present a valid explanation for each day of delay and establish a reasonable ground for not approaching the court within the prescribed limitation period. …
The Gauhati High Court on Monday refused to entertain an application for condonation of delay of 531 days in filling of an appeal against a Single Bench ruling that declared the constitution of Justice K.N. The division bench of the Chief Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Mitali Thakuria observed that not only have the applicants failed to convincingly explain the …
The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission bench comprising Mr. C. Vishwanath as the presiding member and Mr. Subhash Chandra as a member recently observed that the condonation of delay cannot be claimed as a matter of right and should be explained for every day of the delay. The bench observed this while dismissing a revision petition filed under Section 21 …
The Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has held that consumer forums must decide the application for condonation of delay in filing of a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 first, before adjudication on merits.noted that Section 69 of the Act clearly provides that no complaint will be entertained unless the Commission, whether at district, state. The Uttar …