C.C.S.R. No.321/2009

Between:-
N.C.H.A.Sashi Kiran Kumar
S/o.Ramanuja Chary, aged 29 years, Occ: Pvt.employee
R/o.H.No.19-8/1, Aanmol Paradise, Flat No.202,
Near V.V. Nagar Bus Stop,
Dilsukhnagar,
Hyderabad. …… Complainant
And
M/s. GPR Housing Pvt. Ltd.,
Rep. by its Managing Director
R/o.G-128, Ground Floor, H.No.8-3-224/11/D/4,
Madhura Nagar, G-Block 128,
Near Yousufguda Basthi,
Hyderabad. .... Opposite party

This Petition coming on 02-04-2009 for final hearing before this Forum in the presence of Sri G.Upender Rao, Counsel for Complainant and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum pronounced the following:-

O R D E R

(Per Hon’ble President, Sri M.Vijaya Bhaskara Reddy on behalf of the Bench)
1. This is a Petition filed by the Petitioner/Complainant under section 24(A) of Consumer Protection Act 1986 for condoning the delay of 865 days in filing the complaint.


2. The Complainant in his affidavit affirmed that he joined as a member in the Venture of the opposite party on 18-02-204 by paying Rs.4,500/- initially and later paid Rs.1,53,000/-, in all Rs.1,57,500/-which includes the registration charges of a Plot. The opposite party also collected Rs.7,000/- on 08-09-2004 towards registration charges. However, the opposite party failed to register the Plot. Finally, he got issued a legal notice dated 18-11-2008 demanding registration.


3. With regard to the delay, the complainant came out with a reason that his Mother, who suffered massive heart attack, was admitted in the Apollo Hospital, that after taking treatment, she was discharged and was advised bed rest and medication and that therefore he could not file the complaint within time. Even according to the petitioner /complaint, there is the delay of 865 days in filing this complaint. He further pleaded that he was in mental agony and tension due to the health of his mother and as he had to attend on her, he concentrated on her health and hence the delay.


4. The Point for consideration is whether the petitioner /complainant could make out that there was sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within the period of limitation so as to invoke section 24 A of C.P. Act 1986.


5.Point:-Section 24 A(1) mandates that the complaint should not be admitted if it is not filed within 2 years from the date of which, the cause of action has arisen. Section 24 A (2) provides relaxation for section 24 A(1). If the complainant satisfies the District Forum that he had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within the prescribed period, the same could be entertained.


6. There is a proviso to this section to the effect that the Forum should record reasons for condoning the delay.

7. Now it has to be seen as to whether the complainant could convince the Forum that he has sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within the stipulated period. The complainant has enclosed the discharge summary issued by Apollo Hospital, Hyderabad to convince this Forum that his mother was hospitalized for her heart ailment. As seen from the discharge summary, the mother of the complainant was admitted on 24-12-2005 and was discharged 5 days later i.e., on 29-12-2005. She was prescribed with some medicines and was advised to go to the hospital for review 3 days thereafter. So, from this document it can be said that the complainant, being the son, would have attended on his mother from 24-12-2005 to 01-01-2006 i.e., for a period of 8 days.


8. He could not produce any record to show that he had taken any action in the meanwhile till 18-11-2008 when he got issued a legal notice. So, even by 18-11-2008 more than 4 years had elapsed ever since after his payment of Rs.7,000/- towards registration charges on 08-09-2004. He filed this complaint on 02-02-2009. There is absolutely no explanation as to why he could not file the complaint for years together. Even after the discharge of his mother, he waited for more than 3 years. After all, the Hospitalization of the mother was for only 5 days and as such it cannot be the cause much less a sufficient one for not filing the complaint in time. There is the huge delay of 865 days and the same has not been explained to the satisfaction of this Forum. The principle goes that a person coming to the FORA with a petition for condonation of delay, has to explain each day’s delay. The complainant could not fulfill the said principle. So, we cannot condone the delay as the petitioner failed to make out or place any material to show that he had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint in time.


9. In the result, this petition is dismissed no costs.