IN THE COURT OF THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

KEONJHAR

      CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 8 OF 2019

Rajat kumar Barik, aged about 35 years

S/O Late Sankarsan Barik.At-Putulia,

Po-Padampur, P.S-Sadar.

Dist-Keonjhar………………………….………….…………...…..… Complainant

                     Versus

1.Branch Manager

SBI General Insurance Company Ltd.

At-Praful Tower,second Floor,Plot No-184(P)

Panposh Road,Rourkela,Sundaragarh,Odisha-769004

2. Ambuja Das

S/O-Sradhananda Das

At/Po-Puruna Bazar,PS-Town

Dist-Keonjhar………………………………………………………… Opp.Parties

 28.03.2019 - The Advocate for the complainant is present and filed attendance memo .This case was posted to-day for hearing on admission. We perused the case record and documents available in this record filed by the complainant. It is seen that the complainant has mentioned in his petition in   para 13 that the cause of action arose on 3.4.2015 .When the vehicle was stolen  while standing near Atual Mishra petrol pump,Raisuan,Dist.Keonjhar,and on 9.11.2015  claim register by Op-1 and on 21.9.2018 ,when the Op-1 reply to manoj Kumar Mohanta ,Adv. for complainant denying of getting information from the petitioner regarding stolen of vehicle through his Advocate Nidhi singh. Law is well settled that the complainant should file this case within 2 years from the date of incident and the reply of Advocate notice after 2 years from the date of incident cannot be invoked for fulfilling the lacuna of limitation. Please quote Ref;-The Hon’ble Apex court in Kandmalla Raghavaiah and Co. vrs National Insurance Co.Ltd. & another .2009(J) 951 (supreme court) Op took view of the observations made in case state Bank of India Vrs. B.S .Agricultural industries (1) (2009) (J) 481 (SC)(CP) JT 2009 CTJ 481(SC)(CP)=JT 2009 (4) SC 191 in this court ,while dealing with the same provision that it is peremptory in nature and required consumer forum to see before it admits the complaint that it has been filed within two years from the date of accrual /actual cause of action. As a matter of, the consumer forum must deal with the complaint  on merits only of the complaint has been filed within two years. We took up your grievance and perused the contents with the due application of mind based on the records available with this case. Instead of touching the heart of the problem, the learned counsel for the complainant attempted to skirt it. Law is well settled that notices & Letters do not extend the time of limitation. The case must be filed within two years from the date of repudiation of claim. Again; sufficient causes cannot be erased from section 5 of the Limitation Act. by adopting excessive liberal approach which would defeat the very purpose of section 5 of the Limitation Act. There must be some cause, which can be termed as sufficient cause for the purpose of delay of condonation. In the instant case, if the delay is condoned, the very purpose and scheme of the C.P.Act-1986 shall stand defeated. It must be borne in mind that C.P.Act,1986 ,envisages summary procedure and has its own period of limitation. It is also note able that day-to –day delay has not been explained, in the present case. Such like stories can be created at any time .It would be seen from the aforesaid provision that it is peremptory in nature and requires consumer Forum to see before it admits the complaint that it has been filed within two years from the date of accrual of cause of action. The expression, shall not admit a complaint occurring in section 24 A is sort of a legislative command to the consumer Forum to examine on its own whether the complaint has been filed within limitation period prescribed there under. As a matter of law, the consumer forum must deal with the complaint on merits only if the complaint has been filed within two years from the date of accrual of cause of action. In our opinion that the complaint has filed after more than three years. Hence in this present case this forum has no jurisdiction to admit this case as this case is barred by limitation. Hence this case is not admitted and same is rejected. Copy of the order may supply to the complainant if applied for.

(B.B Das)                                                                                                                                                    (B.Giri)

Member                                                                                                                                                  Member (W)                                                                                                                                                                      President (I/C)