Heard.  The above complaint is filed U/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act for an order directing the opposite party to pay an amount of Rupees Nineteen lakh with 10% interest from the date of contract till realization.

The issue that has to be considered from the outset is the question of delay in filing the complaint.  Petition filed to condone delay.

          The subject matter involved in this matter is in connection with the granting of loan.  Persuaded by the Manager King Star Insurance Agency complainant applied for granting a loan of one crore.  He had also paid `2,00,000 as process fee for granting the loan.  On the assurance of granting loan he started construction of his house.  He could not complete it according to his planning.  Complainant was informed in 2005 that his loan application is rejected without stating any reason.  The documents and process fee has not been returned to him.  Though transaction took place in the year 2005 complainant failed to file the complaint within the statutory period of 2 years since he was laid up.  According to complainant he could not file the complaint in time since he was laid up.  He had been suffering from cardiac problems and under treatment for a long time.  Since he was not able to recover from same by medication he was subjected to bypass surgery and discharged from the hospital on 19.09.2009.  After discharge he was constrained to continue the treatment, whereby he was not able to approach the Forum in time.  Hence to condone the delay.

          It can be seen that the complainant was well informed the rejection of loan in the year 2005, even according to complainant. In other words the cause of action arose in the year 2005.  Complaint filed on 20.12.2011. The delay caused for more than five years.   Complainant adduced evidence so as to explain the delay.  He has admitted in chief examination that “2005-þ-emWv tem¬ \ntj-[n-¨p-sIm-­p-ff intimation In«n-bXv ImcWw Bh-i-y-s¸-«p-sIm­v t\m«okv Ab-¨n-cp-¶p. adp-]Sn H¶pw X¶n-Ã.  lcPn sImSp-¯Xv 2011-þ-em-Wv. ”  Admittedly there is a delay of more than 5 years in filing the complaint.  The statutory period allowed to admit the complaint is 2 years.  However, a complaint may be entertained after the period if the complainant had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within such period.   So we are called upon to examine the reasons to be recorded for condoning the delay.

          Complainant in his chief examination stated that “cardiac problem Df-fXp sIm­mWv sshIn-b-Xv.  Rm³ treatmentembn-cp-¶p.  2006 apX  treatmentembn-cp-¶p.  Manipalþ Kasturba Hospitalembn-cp¶p treatment.  Continuous treatment Bbn-cp-¶p.  \m«nepw hntZ-i¯pambn-cp-¶p. Angiogram sNbvXp. Bypass 2009þ sNbvXn-cp-¶p.  A_p-Zm-_n-bn \n¶mWv Bypass sNbvX-Xv.”  Ext.A1 series and Ext.A2 marked with objection, are documents produced by complainant so as to prove the treatment and operation.  Even if these documents are taken for granted that does not cover convincingly the entire length of 5 years period, for justifying the condonation of delay.  In the cross examination complainant deposed that “2005þ\v tijw C´-y-bn hcn-Ibpw t]mhp-Ibpw sN¿m-dp-­v.” If he was able to go abroad and come back it can also be assumed that it was possible for him to make arrangements to file a complaint.  The available evidence including treatment records doesn’t supply a satisfactory explanation sufficient enough to hold that there is reasonable cause for not filing the case within such a long period of 5 years.  In such circumstances, the complaint, held time barred and not entertainable.  Petition to condone delay stand dismissed.  Hence the complaint also dismissed.

      Dated this the 12th day of April, 2012.

         Sd/-  President            Sd/-  Member          

forwarded by order

Senior Superintendent