Haryana

Faridabad

CC/655/2021

Naib singh s/o Jallor Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Indian Overseas Bank - Opp.Party(s)

02 Aug 2022

ORDER

Distic forum Faridabad, hariyana
faridabad
final order
 
Complaint Case No. CC/655/2021
( Date of Filing : 21 Dec 2021 )
 
1. Naib singh s/o Jallor Singh
H. No. 523, Sec-29, FBD
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Indian Overseas Bank
NHPC Branch Sec-33, FBD
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 02 Aug 2022
Final Order / Judgement

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.

 

Consumer Complaint  No.655/21.

 Date of Institution: 21.12.2021.

Date of Order: 02.08.2022.

 

Naib Singh aged 59 years son of Shri Jallor Singh resident of House No. 523,  Sector-29, Faridabad Haryana – 121008. Aadhar Card No. 624980884982 Mobile No. 9818467347

                                                                   …….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 Naib Singh 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.20,845/- 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 Naib Singh 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.20,845/- 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.

 

                                                 

                                               

 

 

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.