Question

Any person aggrieved by an order made by the District forum may prefer an appeal against such order to the ---------- within a period of ---------- days from the date of the order.

• A. State Commission,30
• B. State Tribunal,30
• C. State Forum, 30
• D. State Commission, 60

Hint:

Remember the hierarchy of the consumer forums under the 1986 Act: District Forum $\rightarrow$ State Commission $\rightarrow$ National Commission $\rightarrow$ Supreme Court. The limitation period for appeal at each stage (except to the Supreme Court) is 30 days.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

Questions like this are easiest to crack by separating the two variables, the name of the forum and the number of days, and checking each independently.

1. Name check: The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 sets up a three-tier structure, District Forum at the bottom, State Commission in the middle, and National Commission at the top; "State Tribunal" and "State Forum" are not names this Act uses anywhere, so both can be eliminated on this ground alone.
2. Number check: Section 15 fixes the appeal period at thirty days from the date of the District Forum's order, not sixty, so the "State Commission, 60" option fails on the numeric half even though its name is correct.
3. Combine: The only option that survives both checks is the one naming the State Commission and fixing thirty days.

The correct answer is State Commission, 30.

Answer 2

It also helps to think about consistency across the Act's appeal structure, since the Consumer Protection Act uses parallel language at each stage of appeal.

1. State Commission, 30: Just as an appeal from the District Forum goes up to the State Commission within thirty days, the Act also allows appeal from the State Commission to the National Commission within thirty days, showing that thirty days is the Act's consistent appeal window at this level, and "State Commission" its consistent name for the intermediate forum.
2. State Tribunal, 30: Nowhere else in the Act does the word "Tribunal" appear as the name of a body in this three-tier hierarchy, which is itself a sign that this option has substituted an unrelated term for the Act's actual terminology.
3. State Forum, 30: "Forum" consistently refers to the district-level body throughout the Act; using it for the appellate body breaks the Act's own internal consistency in naming.
4. State Commission, 60: Doubling the actual thirty-day window to sixty does not match the consistent thirty-day pattern the Act follows for appeals at this stage.

Checking the option against the Act's own consistent naming and timing pattern confirms the right pairing.

So, the correct answer is State Commission, 30.