Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/15/150

Kulwant Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Suresh Tractor and Spare - Opp.Party(s)

Jagtar Singh Adv.

26 Mar 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, LUDHIANA.

 

                                                                 Complaint No: 150 of 10.03.2015

                                                                                                                    Date of Decision: 26.03.2015

 

Kulwant Singh aged about 55 years s/o Sh.Komal Singh resident of Village Kanija Tehsil and District Ludhiana.

                                                                                      … Complainant

                                      Versus

1. Sawraj and Spares, Sawraj Combine Hardware, Head office Sector Phase-4, Industrial Area, Mohali, through its Senior Manager/Authorized Signatory.

2. Suresh Tractors and Spares, Ferozepur Road, Opp. Stan Auto, Tharike, Ludhiana, through its Authorized Person.

                                                                             … Opposite parties

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE

CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

 

Quorum:     Sh.R.L.Ahuja, President

                     Smt.Priti Malhotra, Member.

                     Sh.Sat Paul Garg, Member

 

Present:       Sh.Guriqbal Singh, Advocate for complainant.

 

                   

                        ORDER

 

(R.L.AHUJA, PRESIDENT)

 

1.                Heard on the point of maintainability. It is alleged in the complaint that the complainant purchased one tractor Swaraj 855 bearing its registration no.Pb-10-DE-5257 from OPs on dated 01.09.10 on cash payment of Rs.5,27,000/- for his personal use. But after 15 days from it purchase, the said tractor started showing some problem of leaving more smoking and consuming more fuel. The complaint made complaint to OP2, but in spite of solving the said problem, the employees of OP2 insulted the complainant and then the complainant made written complaint to OP1. OP1 told OP2 strictly to solve the above said problem. Then the OP2 called the complainant. The complainant came to OP 2 alongwith his cons Harjinder Singh. After seeing the said Tractor mechanic of the OP2 told to the complainant that the engine in the said tractor is not of Kirloskar Engine. Thereafter complainant complained to the OP2 about the said fact and requested them for the tractor of having Kirloskar Engine, who gave assurance to the complainant that the tractor will be given having Kirloskar Engine and they will provide the Kirloskar Engine within few day and after few days OP2 changed the body and some parts of the said tractor saying that they have fitted the original engine of Kirloskar (closed box) and the said tractor was handed over to the complainant. On 8.10.14 one known of the complainant namely Baljinder Singh s/o Hari Dass r/o Village Dheiry Tehsil and District Ludhiana purchased one tractor Sawrarj DT model 855 from OP2, but after few days, the said Baljinder Singh came to know that that the said tractor is not having the Kirloskar Engine and he visited the OP2 and complained about this and also requested to bring the packed Kirlosar Engine, then the said dealer told to the complainant that OPs did not give packed Kiroskar Engine and only changed the body of the tractor and not fitted the original engine of Kirloskar. In this way, OP2 cheated the complainant by saying that there is original Kirloskar Engine.

2.                The perusal of the complaint reveals that complainant purchased one tractor Swaraj 855 bearing registration no.PB-10-DE-5257 from OPs for a cash payment of Rs.5,27,000/- from the OPs. After 15 days from its purchase, the same started problems of leaving more smoking and consuming more fuel and thereafter complainant came to know that the engine of the said tractor is not a Kirloskar Engine, after the inspection of the mechanic of the OP2. It further appears from the contents of the complaint that complainant purchased the said tractor on 1.9.10 and after 15 days, it came to his knowledge that the tractor of the vehicle was not of Kirlosar company. The cause of action accrued to the complainant in the year 2010, but the present complaint was filed on 10.03.15, after the elapse of more than four years and the complainant was required to file the complaint within a period of 2 years from the cause of action as per the Section 24A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. 

3.                Section 24-A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 which provides the period of Limitation Period, which describes as under:-

i)The District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen.

ii) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), a complaint may be entertained after the period specified in sub-section (1), if the complainant satisfied the District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, that he had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within such period:

provided that no such complaint shall be entertained unless the National Commission, the State Commission or the District Forum, as the case may be, records its reasons for condoning such delay.

4.                Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in a case reported as State Bank of India vs. M/s B.S.Agriculture Industries (I)-(2009) CPJ-481, wherein, it was held that the provisions of Section 24-A are 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. 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 prescribed thereunder. That the Consumer Fora’s were debarred from entertaining any complaint, which was beyond the period of limitation. Para -8 of the said 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.”          

5.                From the perusal of the above said provisions, it is clear that the present complaint is not maintainable and is also time barred and the same cannot be admitted for hearing. Further there are allegations of cheating and fraud against the OPs, which needs elaborate evidence with examination and cross examination of the witnesses, which is not possible in summary proceeding before this Forum.

6.                In view of the above observations, the present complaint is hereby not admitted. Copy of the order be supplied to the complainant, free of cost. File be consigned to record room.

 

                   (Babita)                          (S.P.Garg)                      (R.L.Ahuja)

                   Member                             Member                        President

Announced in Open Forum.

Dated:26.03.2014 

Hardeep Singh