Per Mr P N Kashalkar, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member

          Both the parties are absent. 

1.      This appeal is filed by the complainant whose complaint was dismissed by District Consumer Forum, Nagpur in CC No.562/07 on 14.03.2008.

2.      The case of the complainant / appellant herein before the Forum below was that he had purchased one Plot bearing No.14 of Mouza Beltarodi, Gram Panchayat Beltarodi, P.H.No.38, Khasra No.100, Tah. & Dist. Nagpur having total area of 1800 sq.ft.  from o.p. – M/s Chaterjee & Associates who executed the sale-deed in favour of the complainant.  The sale-deed was duly registered before the Sub-Registrar on 22.05.2001 after receiving the consideration amount.  His grievance in the complaint was that despite registration of the plot he was not given the possession of the plot by the o.p. and therefore, there is a deficiency in service.

3.      O.p. filed their written version before the Forum in response to the notice and stated that complaint is clearly barred by limitation because cause of action arose on 21.05.2001 when the sale-deed was executed.  But complaint came to be filed on 17.12.2007 i.e. after 6-7 years.  

4.      The sale-deed was executed on 21.05.2001 and possession of the plot and the temporary structure thereon was handed over to the complainant. O.ps. denied the allegations that they had withheld the possession of the plot and therefore, prayed for dismissal of the complaint with cost. 

5.      The Forum below observed that the o.p. have given the possession of the plot to the complainant.  Moreover, the Forum below also noted that the complaint is barred by limitation because it was not filed within two years as the plot was duly registered in favour of the complainant on 22.05.2001 and complaint came to be filed on 17.12.2007 i.e. after lapse of 6-7 years.  On this count the Forum below was pleased to dismiss the complaint.

6.      On perusal of the impugned order and the documents on record, we are finding that there is no substance in the appeal as the complaint was hopelessly barred by limitation; moreover, there is not consumer dispute between the parties. Such transaction does not fall within the meaning of consumer dispute.  Therefore, on this count also the appeal filed by the complainant is not tenable in law.  Hence we pass the following order:

ORDER

1.      Appeal is dismissed.

2.      No order as to costs.

3.      Parties be informed accordingly.

          Pronounced on 13.04.2011.