ORDER : The petitioner is aggrieved by refusal of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to condone 382 days delay in the filing of an appeal against the order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai. 2. The State Commission allowed the complaint filed by the respondent and directed the petitioner to refund the amount deposited by her for providing admission in MBBS course at Rostov University by observing that the petitioner was guilty in deficiency of service. 3. The petitioner challenged the order of the State Commission by filing an appeal. It also filed an application for condonation of 382 days delay. 4. The National Commission noted that notice of the complaint filed by the respondent in 2009 was duly served upon the petitioner and although it had appeared through Mr. Sam Arun Prasad but vakalatnama and written statement were not filed and on 28.4.2011 it was set ex-parte. The National Commission held that there was no valid ground or justification to entertain the prayer made for condonation of delay. In arriving at this conclusion, the National Commission relied upon the judgment in Anshul Aggarwal v. New Okhla Industrial Development Authority 2012(1) CPC 3 S.C. 5. In our view, the reasons assigned by the National Commission refusing to condone the delay are legally correct and the impugned order does not call for interference under Article 136 of the Constitution. 6. The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed. The petitioner is allowed one month's time to comply with the order of the State Commission. It shall submit compliance report before the State Commission within a period of 6 weeks from today. Petition dismissed.