M/s Maruti Suzuki Limited was the opposite party before the District Forum. Complainant booked a Maruti 800 car with the petitioner in the year 1986 and was allotted priority number 0002-N-07461 vide letter dated 22.02.1987. As per allegations made in the complaint, respondent was not delivered the vehicle in spite of approaching Ganga Automobiles Limited, opposite party no.1 (respondent no.2
-2- herein) – dealer of the petitioner. The customers who booked their vehicle later than the complainant had been given delivery of the vehicle in the year 1987. Respondent filed the complaint with the allegations that she suffered loss on account of non-delivery of the vehicle as by that time the price of the car had increased threefold to Rs.1,85,000/-. Complaint was filed in the year 1999. Petitioner herein which was the opposite party no.2 before the District Forum on being served entered appearance and filed the Written Statement. Preliminary objection taken was that the complaint was barred by limitation. On merits it was stated that the dealer respondent no.2 had written several letters informing her about the maturity of allotment number but the respondent did not approach the authorized dealer and deposit the price of the vehicle for delivery; that the Maruti 800 was declared ‘Free Sale’ w.e.f. 01.04.1990. District Forum, though, came to the conclusion that the complaint was barred by limitation, allowed the complaint by observing that the ‘technical ground of limitation’ does not hold good in the field of consumer fora. Petitioner being aggrieved filed the appeal before the State Commission which has been dismissed with costs which were assessed at Rs.10,000/-. Counsel for the petitioner relying upon the judgment of Supreme Court of India in State Bank of India vs. M/s. B.S. Agricultural Industries (I) – (2009) CPJ 481 contends that the complaint filed by the complainant/respondent was barred by limitation. As against this, counsel for the respondent/complainant contends that the respondent had been continuously approaching the dealer as well as the petitioner but the car was not delivered; that the complaint was well within limitation as the cause of action was continuous in nature; that the security amount was also not refunded. Facts are not in dispute. Complainant booked the car in the year 1986. The customers who booked the car later than the respondent were delivered the cars in the year 1987. Maruti 800 was made free sale w.e.f. 01.04.1990. Respondent/complainant has not placed any documentary evidence to show that she had ever approached the petitioner or the dealer seeking delivery of the vehicle. Complaint was filed in December 1998 which was registered as complaint of 1999. We agree with the view taken by the District Forum that the complaint was barred by limitation. Supreme Court of India in B. S. Agricultural Industries’ case (supra) while interpreting Section 24A of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 prescribed Limitation has held that the provision is peremptory in nature and requires consumer fora to see whether the complaint has been filed within two years from the date of arising of cause of action; that the expression, `shall not admit a complaint’ occurring in Section 24A is sort of a legislative command to the consumer forum to examine on its own whether the complaint has been filed within limitation period or not; that the consumer fora as a matter of law are required to deal with the complaint on merits only if the complaint has been filed within two years from the date of arising of cause of action. Para-8 of the aforesaid judgment reads as under : “It would be seen from the aforesaid provision that it is peremptory in nature and requires consumer forum to see before it admits the complaint that it has been filed within two years from the date of accrual of cause of action. The consumer forum, however, for the reasons to be recorded in writing may condone the delay in filing the complaint if sufficient cause is shown. The expression, `shall not admit a complaint’ occurring in Section 24A is sort of a legislative command to the consumer forum to examine on its own whether the complaint has been filed within limitation period prescribed thereunder. As a matter of law, the consumer forum must deal with the complaint on merits only if the complaint has been filed within two years from the date of accrual of cause of action and if beyond the said period, the sufficient cause has been shown and delay condoned for the reasons recorded in writing. In other words, it is the duty of the consumer forum to take notice of Section 24A and give effect to it. If the complaint is barred by time and yet, the consumer forum decides the complaint on merits, the forum would be committing an illegality and, therefore, the aggrieved party would be entitled to have such order set aside.” In the present case, respondent/complainant had booked the vehicle in the year 1986. The customers who booked the vehicles later than the respondent/complainant were delivered the vehicles in the year 1987. Maruti 800 was declared free sale w.e.f. 01.04.1990. The complaint filed in the year 1998, under the circumstances, was clearly barred by time. The District Forum, though, in its order came to the conclusion that the complaint was belated but treated it as a ‘technical ground’ which does not hold good in the field of consumer fora. In view of law laid down by Supreme Court of India, the view taken by the District Forum cannot be upheld. State Commission has not discussed this point at all. Respectfully following the view taken by the Supreme Court we accept this revision petition, set aside the orders passed by the fora below and dismiss the complaint leaving the parties to bear their own costs At this stage, counsel for the petitioner in all fairness states that the petitioner undertakes to refund the sum of Rs.10,000/- deposited by the respondent/complainant in the year 1986 along with simple interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of deposit till the payment. Petitioner is directed to refund this amount to the respondent/complainant within eight weeks from today. | 
