MS. NIPUR CHANDNA, MEMBER
ORDER
29.02.2024
1. A complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act filed. In brief the facts are that complainant purchased Maruti Suzuki Vitara Brezza (ZDI) on 15.03.2017 from OP-2. It is alleged by the complainant that in the initial years running of car is not satisfactory, there is sticky steering and abnormal noise in the vehicle. As such the complainant visited to the service center of the OP and asked to rectify the same. It is alleged by the complainant that through reliable sources it came to his knowledge that vide circular dated 25.07.2019 OP-1 was recalling the vehicle having certain chassis number, but neither OP-1 nor OP-2 informed the complainant through any medium in respect to the recalling of the vehicle in question due to manufacturing defect, where as his vehicle falls in the list of that chasis numbers. On various occasions complainant approached OPs and requested them in respect to the recalling of the vehicle in question in terms of the circular dated 25.07.2019 but all in vain. On the advise of the official of OP-1 on 12.10.2022 complainant visited J.J Impacts Delhi Ltd. service center of the OP-1 and requested it to replace the faulty part but the authorized service center denied the repairing as well as recalling the vehicle in question by stating the reason that the vehicle was purchases five years back and as such no resolution can be proposed from their end. It is further alleged by the complainant that the entire conduct of the officials of the OP as well as the circular dated 25.07.2019 established that the vehicle in question is having the manufacturing defect hence, needs to be replaced which OP-1 failed to do. Being aggrieved by the conduct of the OP complainant approached this Commission for redressal of his grievance.
2. The present complaint case is on admission stage. We have heard complainant and have perused the record.
3. Complainant had placed on record copy of RC, copy of circular dated 24.07.2019 as well as email communication exchanged between the parties.
4. 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 Comission , 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. On perusal of record before us, we found that the complainant had purchased the vehicle in question on 15.03.2017 and the circular relied upon by complainant is of 24.07.2019. The complainant has alleged that vide the circular dated 24.07.2019 the OP has recall the vehicle pertaining to certain chassis number and his case fall in that category. The complainant must have approach OP as well as the Commission within 02 years of the issuance of the circular dated 24.07.2019. The complainant approached OP company for the first time in the year 2022 in respect to the sticky steering that too after the expiry of five years warranty given by the OP company. The complainant approached this Commission and filed the present complaint on 29.01.2024 i.e. after 4 years and 7 months of the issuance of the circular dated 24.07.2019 which constitute the substantive cause of action for filing the present complaint. The complainant ought to have file the present complaint within two years of the accrual of cause of action but the complainant failed to do so.
7. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered opinion that substantive cause of action for filing the present complaint arose 24.07.2019, the complainant ought to have file the present complaint within two year of the accrual of cause of action. The complainant has filed the present complaint on 29.01.2024 i.e after the delay of 4 years and 7 months, the present complaint is therefore barred by limitation, hence, dismissed. File be consigned to record room.
8. 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 29.02.2024.
Sanjay Kumar Nipur Chandna Rajesh
President Member Member
