Time frame within which a complaint can be filed

 

1.3-4 Time frame within which a complaint can be filed - Section 24A of the Act provides that a consumer dispute can be filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action arises.

Since this provision was inserted in the Act in 1993, before that the Consumer Forums were following the Limitation Act, 1963, which says that a suit can be filed within three years after the cause of action arises.

The point of time when cause of action arises is an important factor in determining the time period available to file a com­plaint. There are no set rules to decide such time. It depends on the facts and circumstances of each case.

Examples :

     1.   A got his eye operated by B in 1989. He got a certifi­cate of blindness on 18th December, 1989. He was still in hope of gaining his sight and went from second operation in 1992 and was discharged on 21-1-1992. He filed a complaint against B on 11-1-1994. B opposed on the ground that more than 2 years were over after 18-12-1989, thus the complaint is not maintainable. The Commission held that here the cause of action for filing the complaint would arose after the second operation when A lost entire hope of recovery. Thus the suit is maintainable - Mukund Lal Ganguly v. Dr. Abhijit Ghosh III 1995 CPJ 64.

     2.   A house was allotted on 1-1-1999. Defects appeared in the house on 10-1-1999. Here the cause of action will arise on 10-1-1999.

It may be noted that these time frames are not absolute limita­tions. If the Consumer Forum is satisfied that there was suffi­cient cause for not filing the complaint within the prescribed period, it can entertain a complaint beyond limitation time. However the Forum must record the reasons for condonation of delay.

Example : A deposited some jewellery with a bank. Bank lost it. Bank kept giving her false sense of hope to retrieve the jewel­lery, and thus A was put in a state of inaction. Later on when A filed a suit on the Bank, it claimed that the suit was not main­tainable as the limitation time after the cause of action arose has lapsed. The Commission reprimanded the bank and admitted the case - Agnes D’Mello v. Canara Bank [1992] I CPJ 335 (NCDRC).