On 25.09.2015 is declared as general holiday on account of Bakrid. Hence, this case is called on 26.09.2015 and the following order is passed.
ORDER
Sri H.M.SHIVAKUMARA SWAMY.
President,
This complaint is filed under section 12 of C.P.Act for a direction to the opposite party to pay a sum of `7,04,925/-. It appears that the claim is barred by limitation. Thereby heard the counsel representing the complainant on this point. Then this matter is set down for orders.
The points that arise for consideration of this Forum are as under :-
- Whether the claim made by the complainant is barred by limitation?
- To what order?
Our findings on the above points are as follows:-
Point No.1:- In the affirmative.
Point No.2:- As per the final order.
REASONS
Point No.1:- As could be seen from the pleadings and the documents, the present complainant has deposited money with opposite party on 6 occasions. The respective date of deposits and date of maturity are shown in the respective F.D. receipts. The date of deposit as well as the date of maturity which is clearly shown in the following schedule:-
Sl. No. | F.D. No. | L.F.No. | Date of Deposit | Date of Maturity | Amount |
1. | 999 | 465/14 | 16.02.04 | 16.02.06 | 20,000/- |
2. | 140 | 6/14 | 18.12.04 | 18.12.08 | 15,000/- |
3. | 148 | 14/17 | 20.12.04 | 20.12.08 | 15,000/- |
4. | 1015 | 11/23 | 20.08.07 | 20.08.08 | 50,000/- |
5. | 832 | 334/24 | 27.03.08 | 27.03.08 | 1,00,000/- |
6. | 119 | 479/29 | 26.12.09 | 26.12.10 | 1,00,000/- |
| | | | TOTAL | 3,00,000/- |
By going through the above particulars, it is clear that the claim made by the complainant is not preferred well within 2 years atlast from the date of maturity as contemplated under section 24(A) of the C.P.Act. The advocate for the complainant submits that the date of cause of action is not only the date of deposit and the date of maturity and it is the date of demand by issuing legal notice to the other side and thereby, the legal notice is issued since there is no compliance by the opposite party, this complaint is filed well within time from the date of issuance of legal notice.
Para 8 of the complaint reads as under:-
The cause of action for the complaint arose on various dates of deposit made by her, the date of demand by the complainant by issuing the notice calling upon the opposite party to repay the amount of `7,04,925/- along with interest by way of damages within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Forum at Mysore.
This para do not disclose the date of deposit or the date of maturity or the date of demand or the date of legal notice. Of course, the documents reveals the date of deposit, date of maturity and the date of issuance of legal notice. The advocate for the complainant is vehemently contended that from the date of demand, the cause of action arises and extends as such, the claim is well within the time.
But, such submission made by the advocate for complainant cannot be accepted for the simple reason that the law will aid the persons who are diligent and not in different. The present complainant slept over the matter for several years after the date of maturity of each F.D. receipts and atlast, by issuing the legal notice dated 07.07.2015 as brought this complaint stating that complaint is filed within the period of limitation. The contention of the advocate for the complainant is to be negatived in view of the judgement of the Hon’ble National Commission in case of Appu Mangarathnam Vs. Shai Sha Finance and Chits and another reported in Vol.I (2015) CPJ 105 (NC). In the above referred judgement, it was contended by the complainant that the service of legal notice will extend the period of limitation. But, such contention of the complainant is negatived by the Hon’ble National Commission and held the cause of action will not extend from the date of service of legal notice, claim is barred by limitation, as such the complaint was dismissed.
In view of the said judgement of the Hon’ble National Commission, this Forum finds that the claim made by the present complainant is not well within two years atlast from the date of maturity of respective F.D. receipts. Thereby, the claims are barred by limitation. Hence, the Point No.1 answered in the affirmative.
Point No.2:- In view of the findings recorded on Point No.1, the complaint is to be dismissed on the ground of limitation. Hence, we pass the following order:-
ORDER
- The complaint is dismissed as barred by limitation.
- Return the original documents and also the postal cover to the complainant.
- Give a copy of this order as per Rules.
