Mr. Justice S.S. Dewan, President—The unsuccessful complainant in Complaint Case No. 176/1992 on the file of the District Forum, Bathinda is the appellant in this appeal.

2. The learned Counsel for the parties are unreservedly agreed that herein there is no dispute whatsoever of facts. These may, therefore, be noticed with relative brevity. Jit Singh complainant was an employee of the National Fertilizers Limited, Bathinda. The said concern had taken out a Group Personal Accident Insurance Policy for its employees with Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. It is common ground that Jit Singh was fully covered by the said policy. It is alleged that the complainant met with an accident on 1.7.1985 and he suffered permanent disablement to the extent of 40% as a result of serious injuries suffered by him. According to the complainant, he was entitled to 50% of Rs. 1,20,000/- i.e. the sum insured in accordance with the conditions of Insurance Policy and he was given only Rs. 17,314/-. Hence the complaint far the recovery of Rs. 42,686/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. On notice being issued; the opposite party. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. filed its written statement and strenuously contested the claim of the complainant. Whilst not laying any challenge to the factual aspects of the case, the basic stand taken on its behalf, was that the National Fertilizers Limited-opposite party No. 2 was insured and the latter had given a receipt dated 20.4.1987 to the Insurance Company for accepting the amount of Rs. 17,314/- in respect of the full and final settlement of the claim of Jit Singh complainant in accordance with Insurance Policy and that the claim having been settled long ago, the complaint filed in the year 1992, was hopelessly time-barred.

3. We are in agreement with the view taken by-the District Forum that the complaint filed by the complainant was clearly time-barred and hence the complainant is not entitled to any relief. The complainant met with an accident on 1.7.1985 and thereafter he lodged a claim with the Insurance company and the latter paid the amount of Rs. 17,314/- to the opposite party No. 2. on 20.4.1987 in full and final settlement of the claim of the complainant in accordance with Insurance Policy. The complainant waited till 15.6.1992 and instituted the complaint. The relevant provision in the Limitation Act, which gets attracted to the case of this kind is the article 44(b) of the First Schedule where under a period of three has been specified as the time limit from the date of the occurrence of the cause of action or where mere has been a repudiation of liability by the insurer, from the date of such repudiation. The period of limitation expired in this case on 20.4.1990. The complaint having been filed about two years thereafter was clearly barred by time and no relief could be granted to the complainant on the basis of the time barred complaint preferred before the District Forum. We have no hesitation in upholding the view expressed by the District Forum that the complaint was liable to be dismissed as barred by limitation.

This appeal is accordingly dismissed. There will be no direction regarding costs.

Appeal dismissed.

–