West Bengal

Howrah

CC/14/594

SHRI SANKTHA PRASAD RAI - Complainant(s)

Versus

Smt. Sandhya Banerjee - Opp.Party(s)

27 Jul 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM HOWRAH
20, Round Tank Lane, Howrah 711 101.
Office (033) 2638 0892, Confonet (033) 2638 0512 Fax (033) 2638 0892
 
Complaint Case No. CC/14/594
 
1. SHRI SANKTHA PRASAD RAI
S/O lt. Mathura Rai 24, Kings Road, Howrah 711 101 constituted attorney of Sri Ram Dilas Rai.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Smt. Sandhya Banerjee
Widow of lt. Dilip Banerjee, 12, Kings Road, P.S. Golabari, Dist Howrah
2. Sri Subrata Banerjee
S/O lt. Dilip Banerjee, 12, Kings Road, P.S. Golabari, Dist Howrah
3. Sri Gora Banerjee
S/O lt. Dilip Banerjee, 12, Kings Road, P.S. Golabari, Dist Howrah
4. Smt. Tapati Banerjee
Widow of lt. Tapan Banerjee, 12, Kings Road, P.S. Golabari, Dist Howrah
5. Sri Rajendra Sharma,
S/O Sri Keshar Deo Sharma 23/1, Dobson Road, P.S. Golabari Dist Howrah 711 101
6. Shri Ram Janam Yadav,
S/O Chotak Yadav 56/1/1, Kings Road, P.S. Golabari Dist Howrah 711 101
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Shri Bhim Das Nanda PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Smt. Jhumki Saha MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Asim Kumar Phatak MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

Order No.   11                                          Date : 27.07.2015.  

          Parties are present. This date was fixed for passing order on the maintainability of   the case on the ground of limitation when the o.ps. submitted that there was agreement for sale between the parties on  10.4.1992 and last payment made on 16.8.1996. The petitioner kept mum since 34.08.2001 for 11 years and filed case no. 8 of 2012  which was dismissed on contest and the original agreement dated 08.07.1990 was declared cancelled also by P.S. no. 37/96 and so new this case is barred by limitation.

          The petitioner objected to the said petition and submitted that it was a mixed question of law and fact as the limitation continued as negotiations were taking place. O.p. nos. 5 to 6 also kept mum on the above subject.

          This Forum considered all aspects of the matter and finds that this is case where the petitioner filed this case after a long period of 11 years even if the limitation continued till that after agreement in 1992.  U/S 24A of the  C.P. Act is laid down that the  District Forum shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within two years from the date on which cause of action arises and here is a case where almost after the decade the case was filed and so the case severely barred by limitation and the petitioner may find relief as to his advanced sum before the proper Forum.

          Hence,

                             O R D E R E D

          That the C. C. No. 594 of 2014 be and the same is barred by limitation and so dismissed.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Shri Bhim Das Nanda]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Smt. Jhumki Saha]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MR. Asim Kumar Phatak]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.