Haryana

Karnal

CC/190/2024

Arvind Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bida Bhiwadi Intergrated Development Authority - Opp.Party(s)

Tapan Verma

22 Apr 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION KARNAL.

                                                Complaint No.190 of 2024

                                                Date of Inst: 05.04.2024

                                                Date of Decision: 22.04.2024

 

Arvind Kumar aged about 38 years son of Shri Kamlesh Verma, resident of H.No.217, Gali No.20A, R.K. Puram, Karnal, now resident of H.No.PB-145, Sector-45, CHD City, Karnal.

 

…….  Complainant

Versus

 

BIDA-Bhiwadi Integrated Development Authority, H-5, Bhagat Singh Colony, UTI Bhiwadi (Alwar), Rajasthan-301019, through its Secretary/authorized signatory.

                                                                 …… Opposite party.

 

Complaint Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 as amdned upto date.

 

 

Before:    Shri Jaswant Singh…………President

                Sh.Vineet Kaushik……….Member

                Dr.Suman Singth…………Member

 

 

Argued by: Shri Tapan Verma, counsel for the complainant.

 

                (Jaswant Singh, President)

 

ORDER:

 

                Today the case is fixed for consideration on the point of admissibility.

2.             The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the Opposite party (hereinafter referred as the ‘Op’) on the averments that on 30.10.2009 had applied for allotment of flat under Rajiv Gandhi Enclave Awasiya Yojna, Bhiwadi, Rajasthan vide application No.2332 by paying application fee of Rs.10,000/- and thereafter Flat No.322 has been allotted in favour of complainant by the department of OP and after allotment of said flat, the complainant deposited an amount of Rs.95,000/- with the OP. Thereafter, OP passed an order dated 07.07.2010 explaining that excess amount of Rs.3929/- has been deposited by complainant and ordered to refund of excess amount in favour of complainant. Thereafter, OP has not made any communication with the complainant for a long period. The complainant sent number of applications under RTI seeking intimation regarding status of flat and payment schedule and in response to said RTI applications, on 19.5.2022, the OP had sent a letter intimating that flat No.322 has been allotted in favour of complainant and possession upto flat No.302 has already been given and allotment in respect of flat No.322 will be allotted in favour of complainant after completion of construction work. Thereafter, waiting sufficient time, when OP neither contacted nor sent any intimation regarding completion of work, the complainant sent a legal notice to the OP but all in vain. Hence, the present complaint.

3.             Arguments on the point of admissibility heard. Record perused. 

 

4.             Before going into the merits of the case, firstly we decide whether the present complaint has been filed within period of limitation or not as prescribed under Consumer Protection Act, 2019?

5.             Limitation for filing a complaint before the Commission, has been described under Section 69 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 which is reproduced as under:-

1. The District Commission, the State Commission or the National Commission shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen.
2. Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), a complaint may be entertained after the period specified in sub-section (1), if the complainant satisfies the District Commission, the State commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, that he had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within such period:

Provided that no such complaint shall be entertained unless the District Commission or the State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, records its reasons for condoning such delay.

6.             As per aforesaid Section of Consumer Protection Act, the limitation for filing a complaint is of two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen. In the present complaint, the cause of action has been arisen on 07.06.2010, when the complainant has paid Rs.95,000/- to the OP with regard to the flat in question and thereafter, the complainant has not made any correspondence with the OP and the present complaint has been filed by the complainant on 05.04.2024 i.e. after the gap of approximately fourteen years from the date of arising the cause of action. Moreover, there is no separate application, on the file to condone the delay or has not made any prayer for condonation of delay in the complaint and no sufficient cause has been shown by the complainant for not filing the complaint within limitation period prescribed in Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Hence, as per the provision of Section 69 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 the present complaint is hopelessly barred by limitation and is not maintainable before this Commission.

7.             However, if we consider, the letter No.2874/22 dated 19.05.2022, whereby it has been intimated to the complainant that the possession of flats upto flat No.302 has been given and after completion of construction work, the possession of remaining flat will be given, in that eventuality, the case of the complainant is pre-mature.

8.             Thus, in view of the above, the present complaint is dismissed being barred by limitation/pre-mature. Party concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and file be consigned to the record room.

 

Dated: 22.02.2024                   

                                                                  President,

                                                     District Consumer Disputes

                                                     Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

(Vineet Kaushik)        (Dr. Suman Singh)

                           Member                          Member