This order shall dispose off the point maintainability of the complaint on the ground that in the present complaint filed by the complainant has claimed the amount Rs.80,85,945/- + interest @ 12% p.a. from 14.11.2020 till realization. As per the Consumer Protection Act 2019, Jurisdiction of District Commission has been specifically mentioned in Section 34 of Act which unsigned as under:-

                        (1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the District Commission shall    

                         have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where  the  value  of  the  goods  or    

                        services paid   as consideration does not exceed fifty lakh rupees.

2.                     At the same time as per the version of the complainant, OP had sent three constituting willful reminders within 14 days and repudiated the claim on 31.03.2022. Meaning thereby the complainant had the knowledge of repudiation dated 31.03.2022. As per Limitation Act, the complaint was to be filed within two years of the repudiation of the claim by the respondents on which the cause of action had arisen. The present complaint has also not been filed within two years of arising of the cause of action as it has been admitted by the complainant that his claim was repudiated on 31.03.2022. As per Section 69 of the Act the complaint was to be filed within two years of the repudiation of the claim. Section 69 is enshrined as under:-

                        Limitation period:- (1) The District Commission, 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.

                        (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), a complaint may    

                         be entertained after the period specified in sub-section (1), if the complainant  

                         satisfies  the  District  Commission,  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. 

3.                     Reliance can also be placed on Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 which runs as under:-

Exclusion of time of proceeding bona fide in court without jurisdiction. —

(1) In computing the period of limitation for any suit the time during which the plaintiff has been prosecuting with due diligence another civil proceeding, whether in a court of first instance or of appeal or revision, against the defendant shall be excluded, where the proceeding relates to the same matter in issue and is prosecuted in good faith in a court which, from defect of jurisdiction or other cause of a like nature, is unable to entertain it.

(2) In computing the period of limitation for any application, the time during which the applicant has been prosecuting with due diligence another civil proceeding, whether in a court of first instance or of appeal or revision, against the same party for the same relief shall be excluded, where such proceeding is prosecuted in good faith in a court which, from defect of jurisdiction or other cause of a like nature, is unable to entertain it.

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in rule 2 of Order XXIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), the provisions of sub-section (1) shall apply in relation to a fresh suit instituted on permission granted by the court under rule 1 of that Order where such permission is granted on the ground that the first suit must fail by reason of a defect in the jurisdiction of the court or other cause of a like nature. Explanation.— For the purposes of this section,—

(a) in excluding the time during which a former civil proceeding was pending, the day on which that proceeding was instituted and the day on which it ended shall both be counted;

(b) a plaintiff or an applicant resisting an appeal shall be deemed to be prosecuting a proceeding;

(c) misjoinder of parties or of causes of action shall be deemed to be a cause of a like nature with defect of jurisdiction.

4.                     Considering all the facts and circumstance of the complaint in hand and after perusing the whole record, this Commission is of the view that the present complaint is not maintainable for lack of peculiarly jurisdiction as mentioned in Section 34 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 as well as Section 69 of Limitation Period of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Hence, the present complaint is hereby dismissed.

5.                     Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties as per rules.   File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.