District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No.661/21.
Date of Institution: 21.12.2021.
Date of Order: 02.08.2022.
Basant Bahadur aged 58 years son of Shri Chain Bahadur, resident of House No. 629, Sector-30, Near Shiv Mandir, Amarnagar S.O. Faridabad Haryana – 121003. Aadhar Card No. 5395 6318 4939 Mobile No. 9816092629.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
Indian Overseas Bank, NHPC Branch, Sector-33, Faridabad through its Chief Manager.
…Opposite party……
Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Now amended Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Mukesh Sharma…………Member.
PRESENT: Shri Himanshu Sharma, counsel for the Complainant.
Sh. Jitender Datta Parashar, counsel for opposite party.
ORDER:
Today the case was fixed for consideration on application.
Counsel for the opposite party has filed an application u/o 7 rule 11 of CPC stating that the complainant Basant Bahadur availed Housing loan on 15.09.2006 from Indian Overseas Bank, NHPC, Faridabad and the same was closed on 30.04.2017. The complainant deposited excess interest amount of Rs.17,899/- was refunded by the bank on 21.09.2017. The above noted complaint is time barred and not maintainable. The counsel for the opposite party has filed the transaction details alongwith the above said application. It has been prayed that the Hon’ble Court may kindly be rejected the above said complaint.
On the other hand, counsel for the complainant has filed reply to the application stating that it is settled law that an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, the Courts have only to see whether the plaint is liable to be rejected on the basis of averments made in the plaint itself. However, the defendant has stated its defence in the present application which is not acceptable in the eyes of law for adjudication of present application. As we all know in the year 2020 to 2021 the diseases Covid-19 was spreading and the Government of India have declare the lockdown in the country and everything was getting closed. Due to a second surge in Covid 19 cases, the Supreme Court advocates on Record Association intervened in the Suo Motu proceedings by filing Miscella neous Application No. 665 of 2021 seeking restoration of the order dated 23.03.2020 relaxing limitation. The aforesaid Miscellaneous Application NO. 665 of 2021 was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 23.09.2021, wherein this court extended the period of limitation in all proceedings before the Courts/Tribunals including this Court w.e.f 15.03.2020 till 02.10.2021.
2. Counsel for the parties have been heard.
3. In this case, the complainant Basant Bahadur availed Housing loan on 15.09.2006 from Indian Overseas Bank, NHPC, Faridabad and the same was close don 30.04.2017. The complainant deposited excess interest amount of Rs.17,899/- was refunded by the bank on 21.09.2017.
4. As per dictum of Section 69 of Consumer Protection Act 2019, the District Commission is empowered to admit a complaint within two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen. Present complaint was filed on 21.12.2021 after a lapse of four years from the date when the cause of action had arisen on 21.09.2017.
5. Resultantly, the complaint is dismissed being time barred. Copy of this order be given to the parties free of costs and file be consigned to the record room.
Announced on: 02.08.2022 (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Mukesh Sharma)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.