IMPORTANT POINT
No relief can be given on a time-barred complaint.

Dr. B.C. Gupta, Presiding Member—This revision petition has been filed under section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 14.12.2015, passed by the Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as ‘the State Commission’) in First Appeal No. 119/2015, “Ashok Aggarwal vs. Improvement Trust, Sangrur & Anr.”, vide which, while dismissing the appeal, the order dated 03.12.2014, passed by the District Forum Sangrur, dismissing the consumer complaint No. 296/2014, was upheld.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the opposite party (OP) Improvement Trust, Sangrur, allotted plot No. 213 in Captain Karam Singh Nagar, Sangrur to Smt. Kaushalya Devi, mother of the complainant Ashok Aggarwal, vide allotment letter No. 3273 dated 06.07.2001. It is alleged in the consumer complaint that Smt. Kaushalya Devi died on 05.10.2003, following which, the complainant applied for the transfer of the plot in his name to the OP on 04.11.2003 and submitted relevant documents like the death certificate etc. alongwith the application. The OP vide their letter dated 21.10.2004 demanded certain documents for the transfer of the plot and according to the complainant, the same were delivered to them. Despite sending the documents, the plot in question, was not transferred in favour of the complainant, rather the OPs raised a demand for deposit of the non-construction fee vide their letter dated 15.06.2005. The plot was ultimately transferred in the name of the complainant on 04.10.2010. Vide letter dated 13.02.2014 from the OP, the non-construction fee for the period 01.08.2004 to 30.06.2014 was demanded. The complainant deposited a sum of Rs. 4,75,000/- on 09.05.2014 with the opposite party under protest and then filed the consumer complaint in question, seeking refund of Rs. 4,75,000/- alongwith interest @12% p.a. alongwith damages and compensation of various amounts.

3. The complaint was resisted by the opposite party by filing a written reply before the District Forum in which they stated that the opposite party had demanded various documents like the legal heirs certificate, succession certificate, registered will, court order or any family settlement etc. from the complainant so as to decide about the transfer of the plot, but the complainant failed to submit any document and hence, the plot could not be transferred in his name. The OP Trust further stated that the complaint in question was highly time-barred. Further, the complainant was no more consumer of the OP, as he had already sold the plot to a third party Chiman Lal s/o Ramesh Chander of Sangrur.

4. The District Forum vide their order dated 03.12.2014, dismissed the complaint on various grounds, saying that the complaint was hopelessly barred by time in view of section 24A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The plot in question had been transferred in the name of the complainant on 04.10.2010, meaning thereby that the complaint could be filed only within two years from that date. The District Forum further observed that even after the transfer of plot in his name, the complainant failed to raise construction on the same and hence, the OP was within their rights to raise demand for non-construction fee. Moreover, the complainant had failed to provide documents to the OP Trust for the transfer of the plot, although they had sent letters to him in this regard. The complainant had also concealed the material fact of selling the plot to Chiman Lal and hence, the complainant did not deserve any relief. Being aggrieved against the order of the District Forum, the complainant filed an appeal before the State Commission, which has been dismissed vide impugned order. The State Commission also observed that after the sale of the plot to Chiman Lal, the complainant ceased to be a consumer of the OP and hence, was not entitled to any relief. Being aggrieved against the said order, the complainants are before this Commission by way of the