M.C.No.464  of 2019

    C.C. No. 60 of 2019

         Heard learned counsel for both sides on the point of limitation.

2.       Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that he has filed the complaint for replacement of the vehicle because the O.Ps have sold the defective vehicle. According to him the vehicle met accident due to non-functioning of frontal airbags.  Learned counsel for the complainant alleges that  the accident took place on 20.01.2016 and complainant sustained injury. He has discharged on 20.03.2016. Thereafter, he remained under advice of doctor and finally filed the complaint case on 08.07.2019.

3.       The main allegation of the complainant is that due to defect in the vehicle, the accident took place. He also admitted that they have received the compensation amount of Rs.11,96,800/-  but for mental agony and defective vehicle no compensation is received. Hence, he  filed the complaint case. So, he submitted to condone the delay and admit the complaint case.

4.       Learned counsel for  O.P.Nos.1 and  2 submitted that the complainant has to prove the delay on day to day basis. He further submitted that the complainant has filed the  consumer complaint on 08.07.2019 whereas the cause of action arose on 20.01.2016. As per complaint petition the complainant after discharge from the hospital has not filed the complaint as he was under medical observation. But, there is no sufficient reason to condone the delay as alleged by the complainant because he has not explained delay before 20.1.2016 and 8.7.2019. So he submitted to reject petition for limitation.

5.       Considered the submission of learned counsel for both the parties and perused the materials available on record.

6.       It is admitted fact that the vehicle of the complainant was purchased from O.P.no.2 and accident took place on 20.01.2016. It is admitted fact that he has discharged from the hospital on 20.03.2016. It is also admitted fact that he has received the insurance amount Rs.11,96,800/- towards the compensation  for damage to the vehicle. The medical certificate which has been filed today by complainant shows that the complainant had multiple diseases like diabetics and other diseases. As it appears that there is no specific reason mentioned for not filed the complaint case on time except his hospitalization from 20.1.2016 to 20.3.2016. Besides this,  he has received the amount for the damaged vehicle. Taking into the nature of allegation   in the complaint that due to defective vehicle the accident occurred is also to be examined but it has not explained why he could not know the defective  side of the vehicle just after its purchase. Of course, the allegation cannot be prejudiced but the ground of complaint must require to be opined as good one. On the other hand, we are not satisfied on the ground to condone the delay. There is no sufficient cause to condone the delay occurred from 20.03.2016 to 08.7.2019. Hence the limitation petition is rejected. Consequently, consumer complaint stands dismissed being not admitted.