SMT. RAVI SUSHA  : PRESIDENT

        Complainant filed this complaint seeking compensation for the medical negligence committed by the OPs.

   Along with the present complaint, complainant filed petition to condone the delay in filing the complaint.  The facts stated in the petition are that once the complainant had approached this Commission by filing a complaint CC/413/2016 against the same OPs on the ground of medical negligence for compensation.  The OPs filed  their  version and contended that the cause of action was not arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this  Forum, lacks territorial jurisdiction and  hence dismissed  the early case. The appeal preferred by the  complainant before Hon’ble State Commission  also was dismissed on the same ground.  Now it is came to  understand that as per the amendment made in the Consumer Protection Act 2019, this Forum  has  territorial jurisdiction and amble power to entertain  his case.  Due to the genuine reason  that the complainant was bed ridden due to injuries and disabled due to  injury,  complainant could not contact  his lawyer  and prefer the above complaint within the statutory period.  The delay in filing the  complaint is not willful or deliberate. Hence filed this petition to condone the delay and the case is to be taken into file.

   Opposite parties strongly opposed the delay condonation petition of complainant and filed written objection stating that the petition is not maintainable either in law or facts.  On the very same cause of action the complainant had filed the complaint CC/413/2016 against the OPs and the same  was dismissed by this commission and the appeal was also dismissed by the Hon’ble State Commission upholding the decision of the District Commission.  OPs further submits that the new enactment came into force w.e.f 9/8/2019 it has no retrospective application.  The amended act is not  giving any special right to the complainant to prefer  fresh complaint ignoring  the provisions contained under Sec.69 of the Act.  The enactment of new statute  is not a ground to condone the delay already crept in.  OPs further stated that the reason put forth by the complainant is not sufficient to condone the delay especially that matter  was finally disposed of by the Hon’ble State Commission.

    Here it is an admitted fact that on the very same cause of action the complainant  filed complaint in the year 2016 before this commission under Sec.12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 and it was dismissed due to  lack of  territorial jurisdiction of this commission as the  OPs were residing out of jurisdiction of this commission.  The appeal preferred by the  complainant before Hon’ble State Commission  also was dismissed on the same ground.  Now the  present complaint is filed as per Sec 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 .  Though this complaint has territorial jurisdiction , the complaint is hopelessly barred by limitation under sec.69.  As contended by OPs, there is no retrospective effect.  As per Sec.69(1) The District 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) a complaint may be entertained after the  period of 2 years, if the complainant satisfies the commission that he had sufficient  cause for not filing  the complaint within such period.  Provided that no such complaint shall be entertained  unless the commission, records its  reasons for condoning such delay.

   Here there is a  delay of about 6 years in filing the present  complaint.  The reasons stated in the  complainant’s petition is not  sufficient to condone such exorbitant delay in filing the complaint.  Complainant could have filed complaint at appropriate District Commission after getting  order from the Hon’ble State Commission.

   From the facts stated above, this commission is not inclined to allow the petition of complainant to condone the delay in filing the complaint.  In the result the delay condonation petition is dismissed.  So the complaint itself is dismissed as it is hopelessly  barred by limitation.

Sd/                                                         Sd/                                                     Sd/

PRESIDENT                                             MEMBER                                               MEMBER

Ravi Susha                                       Molykutty Mathew                                    Sajeesh K.P

eva           

                                                                        /Forwarded by Order/

                                                                   ASSISTANT REGISTRAR