(Per Shri S.R.Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member) (1) This appeal takes an exception to an order dated 08/11/2011 passed in consumer complaint No.53/2010, 1.Ms.Nafisa Masalawalla Vs. 1. Branch Manager, Gowalia Tank Branch, Union Bank of India & anr., passed by South Mumbai District Forum at Mumbai. (2) The consumer complaint pertains to alleged deficiency in service on the part of the respondents/opponents in relation to the operation of account of the complainant from which withdrawals were made from time to time. The cause of action as submitted arose when the bank passbooks, slips and cheque book alongwith her purse were stolen when she was visiting the office of Income Tax and of which a complaint was made to the police. The bank was requested to issue duplicate passbook and a cheque book. On perusal of duplicate passbook, the complainant came to know about fraudulent withdrawals and lodged the complaint on 30/01/2007. The forum considering the material placed on record, found that deficiency in service on the part of the respondent/opponent bank was not established and dismissed the consumer complaint. Feeling aggrieved thereby, the complainant preferred this appeal. (3) Heard learned counsel for the appellant. (4) In the instant case, the event has taken place in December 2006 or knowledge of it on or before 30/01/2007, supra. Consumer complaint was filed on 06/03/2010 and that too without any application for condonation of delay. Therefore, the consumer complaint, perse, since time barred could not be entertained. A useful reference also can be made to the decision of Apex Court in the matter of Kandimalla Raghavaiah & Co. Vs. National Insurance Co.Ltd. & Anr., III (2009) CPJ 75 (SC). (5) Apart from that, what we find is that on the police complaint, the matter was thoroughly investigated by the police. They have examined documents whereby the account was operated and on 09/03/2009, the complainant was informed by the police that there was no fraud committed as concluded by them on the basis of handwriting expert’s opinion obtained. Bank also informed to the complainant about this status accordingly. There is no material to show that investigation by the bank was not proper. Negligence on the part of the bank officials was not at all established. We find no reason to take a different view than what is taken by the District Forum. We hold accordingly and pass the following order. ORDER (1) Appeal is not admitted and disposed off accordingly. (2) No order as to costs. | 
