16/02/2023                                                                            CC/199/2022

Comps by:

OP:

ORDERS ON ADMISSION

2. The complainant by filing the present complaint has stated that, at the time of purchasing the policy from the OP bearing Policy No.615730896 dated 02.06.2017, the complainant had paid Rs.10,000/- and the OP given benefit of Rs.1,00,000/- stating that, above policy will vest on above date and as per policy conditions, the bid value available on the date of vesting will be utilized to purchase the pension on life.If the bid value is below the minimum purchase price under the prevailing annuity plan, the amount will be refunded in full.The minimum purchase price with effect from 16.05.2022 is Rs.1,00,000/-.If the commutation is opted for and the balance purchase price is less than Rs.1,00,000/- then the commuted value will be reduced accordingly.In other words, maximum of 1/3 of purchase price will be available as commuted value but, complainant was given only
Rs.13,651/- on 01.12.2017 and retained Rs.86,349/- and thereby cheated the complainant.

4. In the affidavit annexed to IA, complainant has stated that, in the month of March-2020, the Government declared lockdown due to pandemic Covid-2019.Therefore, the delay has been caused in filing the complaint and hence, prays to allow the IA and condone the delay.

5. Admittedly, the Covid-2019 lockdown was declared in the month of March-2020, whereas the cause of action was arose in the present complaint on 01.12.2017 and the complainant should have filed the complaint before this Commission within two years from the date of cause of action arose i.e., within 01.12.2019 and as per the contention of the complainant, the Covid-2019 lockdown was declared in the month of March-2020.Before imposition of lockdown, the complainant had lost the limitation period for filing the complaint. In spite of it, the complainant should have taken a chance to file the complaint before imposition of lockdown in the month of March-2020 by filing an application for condonation of delay but, he did not do so and has filed the present complaint after a lapse of 5 years and moreover, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Sue-moto case, extended the limitation period till February-2022 for filing the complaint due to Covid-2019.The complainant has also utilized the said period also and he did not come forward to file the present complaint within February-2022 and he has come up with the present complaint after five years from the date on which, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India ends the period of limitation in the month of February-2022.Therefore, we are of the opinion that, the complainant was not diligent in filing the complaint within the period of limitation and he has come up with the present complaint after a lapse of period of limitation and there is an enormous delay of more than 2 years in filing the present complaint.Therefore, the said delay of more than 2 years in filing the complaint cannot be condoned and no sufficient grounds urged to condone the delay in filing the complaint.Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the complaint of the complainant is not maintainable.Hence, we pass the following:

The complaint of the complainant is dismissed as not maintainable since the same is being filed beyond the period of limitation.

             MEMBER              PRESIDENT