Aggrieved by the dismissal of her complaint case No. 94 of 2009 by the order dated 24.2.2010 by the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai, (in short, ‘the State Commission’), the original complainant has filed the present -2- appeal. It would appear that the complaint has been dismissed by the State Commission at the threshold/entertainability stage on the sole ground that it is barred by limitation. The reasoning given by the State Commission is that the cause of action for filing the case like the present one, if at all, arose in favour of the complainant sometime in June, 1993 when the Bank had allegedly made a debit entry of a sum of Rs.3,22,000/- to the account of the complainant. Learned counsel for the appellant seeks to assail the impugned order on the strength of certain correspondence exchanged between the complainant and the opposite party-Bank of Baroda. In particular, he has invited our attention to communication dated 27.6.2007, 11.10.2007 and 15.2.2008. Based on these communications emanating from the opposite party-Bank of Baroda, learned counsel strongly contends that the claim of the complainant for reversal of the entry or payment of the amount was finally repudiated by the last letter dated 15.2.2008 and, therefore, the complaint filed by the complainant in the year 2009 was well within the prescribed time. It would appear that this submission was either not made before the State Commission or overlooked by the State Commission while -3- making the impugned order and the fact of the above referred three communications emanating from the opposite party-Bank of Baroda as in the years 2007 and 2008, has not been considered as to whether it would amount to a continuous and subsisting cause of action or not. Accordingly, we consider it a fit case where the State Commission should be asked to reconsider the matter based on the above material, submissions and decide the same after issuing a notice to the bank and after hearing the say of the opposite party-Bank. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order passed by the State Commission is hereby set aside and the complaint is remitted to the State Commission for deciding the same afresh in terms of above directions. The parties are directed to appear before the State Commission on 9.11.2010 for receiving further directions in the matter.