BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. P. SUDHIR                                       :  PRESIDENT

SMT. R. SATHI                                         :  MEMBER

SMT. LIJU B. NAIR                                  : MEMBER

I.A. No. 01(A)/2017

in

C.C. No. 609/2016

ORDER DATED: 15.06.2017

Petitioner/Complainant:

Pushpalatha K.A, T.C 10/2063, TRA-67, Tozhuvancaudu Lane, Vattiyoorkavu P.O, Thiruvananthapuram-695 013.

                              (By Adv. T.R. Omana Kuttan)

Counter petitioners/Opposite parties:

1. The Syndicate Bank, represented by the Managing Director, Head office of the Syndicate Bank, Door No.16/355 & 365 A, Manipal, Udupi Dist., Karnataka. 

2. The Deputy General Manager, Syndicate Bank, Regional Office, Carmel Towers, Opp: Cotton Hill High School, Vazhuthacaud, Thiruvananthapuram-695 014.

3. The Chief Manager, Syndicate Bank-Main Branch, P.B. No. 110, Statue, Thiruvananthapuram-695 001.

(By Adv. P. Balakrishnan for 3^rd O.P)

ORDER

This I.A filed by the complainant to condone the delay of 544 days in filing the complaint.  Opposite parties filed objection stating that there is no valid reason explained by the complainant for the delay and the issue has already disposed off by appropriate authority, i.e; Banking Ombudsman. 

Perused the petition, objection and documents.  It is seen from the documents that the complainant has concealed the material facts and no reliable reason is made in the petition for condoning the delay of 544 days.  As per Sec. 24(A) of Consumer Protection Act, Limitation Period (1) District Forum, State Commission or the National Commission shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within 2 years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen.  Relying on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Haryana Urban Development Authority and others Vs. Tej Refrigeration Industries Ltd. cited in (2013) 14 Supreme Court Cases 758 and in Kandimalla Raghavaliah & Co. Vs. National Insurance Company & another cited in (2009) 7 Supreme Court Cases 768, we are constrained to dismiss the I.A and complaint not admitted.

In the result, I.A dismissed without cost and complaint not admitted. 

         Sd/-

P.SUDHIR                             : PRESIDENT

         Sd/-

R. SATHI                               : MEMBER

          Sd/-

LIJU B. NAIR                        : MEMBER

jb