MS. NIPUR CHANDNA, MEMBER
ORDER
07.06.2024
1. A complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act filed. In brief the facts of the complaint are that complainant booked the plot in the project of the OP Namely “MAPSKO Garden Estate” situated at Sonipat Road, Haryana by paying a sum of Rs. 5,98,500/- as booking amount in the year 2006 vide receipt dated 13.12.2006. On 12.09.2018 plot buyer agreement was executed between complainant and OP1 and as per which the payment has to be made in installments as per schedule I annexed with agreement. It is alleged by the complainant that she paid a sum of Rs. 8,74.840/- to OP1 in the month of September, 2008. She further paid a sum of Rs. 5,00,140/- to OP1 on 22.11.2011, in all she paid the total sum of Rs. 23,73,480/- to the OP1 as agreed between the parties. It is further alleged by the complainant that even after paying the substantial amount of Rs. 23,73,480/- no offer of possession has ever been issued by OP in favor of the complainant. It is alleged by the complainant that she wrote various letters, emails to OP1 in respect to the plot in question but all in vain. It is alleged by the complainant that after the expiry of the 17 years of the payment the OP1 is not in a position even to get the statutory permission from the competent authority in respect to the project in question, as such OP is not in a position to handing over the possession of the plot till date. The non – handing over of the plot by OP clearly establish the case of deficiency in service on the part of OP, hence, this complaint.
2. The present complaint case is on admission stage. We have heard the arguments advance at the bar by Ld. Counsel for complainant Ms. Gayatri Khaire on admission as well as limitation issue and have perused the record.
3. It is submitted by Ld. Counsel for complainant that the complainant has paid substantive amount of Rs. 23,73,480/- between 2006 to 2011 to the OP. Despite making entire payment of the plot in question OP failed to handover the possession, as such the present complaint is well within limitation and is maintainable before this commission.
4. Before adverting to the disposal of the present complaint let us peruse the relevant provision in respect of limitation provided under Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
As per section 69 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019: -
- The District Forum, the state commission or the National Commission shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen.
- Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (1). A complaint may be entertained after the period specified in sub-section (1), if the complainant satisfies the District Forum, the state commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, that he had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within such period: provided that no such complaint shall be entertained unless the National Commission , the State Commission, as the case may be records its reason form condoning such delay.
5. A perusal of the aforesaid statutory position reflects that the complaint should be preferred within a period of two years of the accrual of cause of action.
6. The complainant has placed on record the copy of plot buyer agreement, copy of payment receipts, copy of letter dated 07.01.2016 issued by OP in respect to the cancellation of the plot and refund of money, copy of letter dated 06.06.2018 thereby requesting the complainant to pay the outstanding amount, copy of payment reminder dated 01.08.2018 and copy of cancellation of the plot and refund of money dated 21.12.2018, copy of cheque issued by OP in favor of the complainant dated 20.12.2018 in support of his contention.
7. Admittedly, the complainant has booked the plot in question in the year 2006. She had made the payment to the OP as per the plot buyer agreement till 22.11.2011. Thereafter, the complainant has failed to place on record any correspondence executed between the parties. The complainant has placed on record the demand letters dated 06.06.2018 and 01.08.2018 issued by OP thereby raising further demand from the complainant in respect to the plot in question . Complainant has failed to place on record any documentary in respect to the protest of further demand or the payment made thereof. she has also placed on record the plot cancellation letter issued by OP 21.12.2018 along with the copy of the refund cheque dated 20.12.2018, hence, we are of the considered opinion that firstly cause of action for filing the present complaint arose on 06.06.2018 and 01.08.2018 when the OP raised the further demand from the complainant. The substantive cause of action for filing the present complaint arose on 21.12.2018 when the OP cancelled the plot in question and paid the refund amount to the complainant by way of cheque dated 20.12.2018. The complainant ought ot have file the present complaint within two years of the accrual of cause of action i.e 20.12.2018 which complainant failed to do .
8. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered opinion that substantive cause of action for filing the present complaint arose 20.12.2018 the complainant ought to have file the present complaint within two year of the accrual of cause of action i.e. 20.12.2020. The complainant has filed the present complaint on 29.05.2024 i.e. after the delay of 3 years and 5 months of the accrual of cause of action, the present complaint is therefore barred by limitation, hence, dismissed.
File be consigned to record room.
10. Copy of the order be given to the parties free of cost as per order dated 04.04.2022 of Hon’ble State Commission after receiving the application from the parties in the registry. Order be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in.
Announced in open Commission on 07.06.2024.
Sanjay Kumar Nipur Chandna Rajesh
President Member Member
