CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
PALAKKAD, KERALA
Dated this the 13th day of December, 2012.
Present: Smt. Seena. H, President
: Smt. Preetha. G. Nair, Member
: Smt. Bhanumathi. A.K, Member Date of filing: 04/12/2012
CC /215/2012
K. Radhamani, - Complainant
“Kaiya”
M.G. Road, Manissery P.O,
East Manissery,
Palakkad – 679 521
(BY ADV. Raghesh.N)
Vs
1. Chairman,
LIS Deepasthambham Project,
Palakkal Court, - Opposite parties
M.G. Road, Ernakulam.
2. Branch Manager,
LIS Deepasthambham Project,
2nd Floor, Sancho Tower,
Opp. K.S.R.T.C, Palakkad
Pin 678 014
O R D E R
BY SMT. SEENA.H, PRESIDENT
Brief case of complaint :-
Complainant entrusted Rs. 2,75,000/-with opposite parties under the LIS Deepasthambham Project. Amount was entrusted on 6/05/2005. There after opposite party failed to keep the assurance regarding return of the amount as per the scheme. Opposite parties promised to return the amount by november 2006. There after it was published in news papers that the amount will be returned on 20.03.2007. Opposite parties failed to keep the promise. Lawyer notice was caused on 30/01/2012 for which no reply was sent. Hence the complaint.
Complainant was posted for hearing on admission. Complainant no representation and hence taken for orders.
As per records it is seen that the complainant entrusted an amount of Rs. 2,75,000/- with opposite parties on 6/05/2005. It was agreed to return by November 2006. So cause of action arose on November 2006. It was submitted by the complainant that the amount was agreed to return on 20/03/2007 as per media reports. So at the most limitation starts from 20/03/2007. Complainant is seen filed on 4/12/2012, ie., after a period of 51/2 years.
As per section 24(A) of Consumer Protection Act , complaint has to be filed within 2 years from the date of cause of action. No application for condone the delay filed and no sufficient reasons for the delay mentioned in the complaint. A lawyer notice sent on 30/01/2012 will not extend the limitation period.
In the view of the above discussions, we are of the view that complaint is barred by limitation and hence without going in to the merits of the case, we dismiss the complaint.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 13th day of December, 2012.
Sd/-
Smt. Seena. H
President
Sd/-
Smt. Preetha.G.Nair
Member
Sd/-
Smt. Bhanumathi.A.K
Member
