Per Shri P.N. Kashalkar, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member
This is an appeal filed by the complainant as his complaint is dismissed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Thane by its impugned order dated 28/08/2002 passed in consumer complaint No.323/2001. The complainant had filed consumer complaint against M/s.Om Umiya Construction Co. alleging that there was deficiency in service on the part of opponent/builder. He took possession of flat on 16/07/1998. He found that built-up area of the flat was 491 sq.ft. and not 521 sq.ft. as was mentioned in the agreement for sale. For the lesser area of the flat given by the builder, he filed consumer complaint claiming amount of `45,390/- since he was charged rate of `510/- per sq.ft. and it was his contention that he was given lesser area of 89 sq.ft.
Said complaint was resisted by the opponent by filing written version. According to the opponent, cause of action for filing of the complaint was arose on 16/07/1998, whereas, the complaint came to be filed in 2001. Therefore, complaint as filed is absolutely barred by limitation. The Forum in Para 3 of the order agreed with the contention raised by the opponent. According to the Forum, possession of the flat was given to the complainant on 16/07/1998 and as per Section 24-A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 within two years the consumer complaint should have been filed. So, the complaint should have been filed on or before 16/07/2000, but it came to be filed on 17/05/2001. So, there was obviously delay in filing complaint and since the delay was not sought to be condoned by filing application to that effect, the Forum held that the consumer complaint as filed by the complainant is absolutely barred by limitation and on this ground alone complaint came to be dismissed. Aggrieved by the dismissal, this appeal came to be filed by the org. complainant.
After filing of the Appeal on 09/01/2003, he did not bother to take circulation for admission. Hence, Suo-motu we took up this appeal on Board and perused the impugned order and we are finding that the impugned order dismissing the complaint passed by the Forum is appearing to be just, proper and it is sustainable in law and there is no merit in the appeal preferred by the org. complainant. In the circumstances, we pass the following order :-
-: ORDER :-
1. Appeal stands dismissed.
2. No order as to costs.
3. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.
Pronounced
Dated 4th July 2011.
