Per – Hon’ble Mr. Dhanraj Khamatkar, Member
This appeal filed by the Appellant/original Complainant (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Complainant’ for the sake of brevity) takes an exception to an impugned order dated 19/1/2012 passed by the Mumbai Suburban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (hereinafter referred to as ‘the District Forum’ for the sake of brevity) in Consumer Complaint No.387 of 2011, Mr. Dilipsinh Mulabhai Gohil Vs. Seema Construction Co. and Another. Facts leading to this appeal can be summarized as under:-
[2] The Complainant had filed a consumer complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Respondent No.1/original Opponent No.1, namely – Seema Construction Co. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Builder/Developer’ for the sake of brevity) and the Respondent No.2/original Opponent No.2, namely – Sai-Ashish-2 Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Society’ for the sake of brevity). In the consumer complaint as filed, the Complainant alleges that the Respondents/original Opponents collected amounts from him in the years 1999, 2000, 2002 and 2004 for various reasons. He alleges that these amounts have been collected unauthorizedly. The Complainant further alleges that he had filed a criminal complaint against the Respondents/original Opponents and the criminal complaint resulted into acquittal. Against the order of acquittal, he filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and subsequently, he has withdrawn the appeal. Basically, the consumer complaint is filed for recovery of the amounts paid by him in the year 1999, 2000, 2002 and 2004 and the consumer complaint was filed on 25/8/2011. The District Forum held that the complaint as filed is time-barred and hence, the District Forum had not admitted the consumer complaint and rejected the same under Section 24-A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. It against this order that the present appeal is filed.
[3] We heard the Appellant who was present in person.
[4] We have gone through the order passed by the District Forum. Alongwith the appeal compilation the Appellant/original Complainant has not attached a copy of consumer complaint which he had filed before the District Forum and the evidence attached with the complaint. In absence of original complaint and the evidence adduced alongwith the complaint, we are unable to ascertain the facts of the complaint filed by the Complainant. No doubt, the complaint is filed for recovery of amounts allegedly paid in the years 1999, 2000, 2002 and 2004. From the order passed by the District Forum it is seen that the cause of action for filing the consumer complaint arose in the years 1999, 2000, 2002 and 2004. As per the provisions of Section 24-A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 a complaint is required to be filed within a period of two years from the date of cause of action. Taking into consideration these facts, the District Forum has rightly rejected the complaint. We do not find any substance in the present appeal filed by the Appellant/original Complainant. We hold accordingly and pass the following order:-
ORDER
The appeal is not admitted and stands rejected summarily.
No order as to costs.
Pronounced on 06th March, 2012
