The main legal point established in the judgment is that the cause of action is continuous until the possession is delivered or the sale deed is executed, and this influenced the court's decision in favor of the complainant.

JUDGMENT :

Mr. Inderjit Kaushik, Presiding Judicial Member-Brig. Harkishan Singh Brar, applicant/complainant (hereinafter called “the complainant”) has filed the present application for condonation of delay in filing the complaint.

2. It was submitted that the complainant is victim of unfair trade practices of the opposite parties. From the year 2006 when the applicant had booked a plot of 500 sq. yds., the complainant has been harassed and humiliated by the opposite parties and was browbeaten firstly for purchasing the plot of 400 sq. yds. instead of 500 sq. yds. particularly when the opposite parties retained the booking amount of Rs.17,25,500/- for a period of 10-1/2 months and thereafter, the agreement to sell was executed on 04.07.2007, but the possession of the plot was handed over after a period of 4-1/2 years, instead of two years as per the terms and conditions of the agreement to sell. As per the agreement to sell, the opposite parties were legally bound to provide basic infrastructure, but till date nothing has been provided. The complainant is raising the construction as per the agreement to sell, by facing acute hardships and problems and suffered huge financial losses, as he has to complete the construction work within two years of the handing over of the possession. From the very beginning, the complainant made numerous requests orally as well as in writing to the respondents, but of no use.

3. The complainant is a Class-I Gazetted Officer. From the very beginning, the complainant was fleeced by the opposite parties, by making false assurances, which is clear from the reply of the opposite parties Annexure C-7, C-7A and C-12/A. Till date, the opposite parties have neither fulfilled the terms of the agreement on their part nor bothered the requests of the applicant. The delay has occurred on account of above reasons and the same is bona fide and not deliberate. It was prayed that the application may be allowed and the delay in filing the complaint may be condoned in the interest of justice.

4. In the reply filed on behalf of the opposite parties, preliminary objections were taken that the application does not disclose any reason for delay in filing the complaint, nor the period of delay has been mentioned and the application deserves to be dismissed. In Para-20 of the complaint, the complainant has admitted that the cause of action arose in 2007 and as such, the limitation for filing the complaint expired in 2009, whereas the complaint has been filed in 2013. The period of four years has not been explained despite the fact that the complainant withdrew the Complaint No.11 of 2013 filed by him, seeking liberty to file fresh complaint along with the application for condonation of delay. No explanation or sufficient reason has been shown.

5. On merits, it was submitted that the complaint does not disclose any cause of action and is time barred. The contents of Paras-2 & 3 contain averments on merits and cannot be raised in the application for condonation of delay. No explanation of delay of more than four years has been given. The application is vague and without any basis and does not disclose any cause, much less sufficient cause for condonation of the delay. Similar other pleas as taken in preliminary objections were raised and it was prayed that the application may be dismissed as well as the complaint may also be dismissed, being time barred.

6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.

7. The complainant applied for plot and Plot Buyer’s Agreement (in short, “the agreement”) was executed between the parties on 4th July, 2007. The complainant made the entire payment as per the schedule of the payment and as per letter of the opposite parties dated July 6, 2009, he qualified for 5% incentive under the program. The complainant was to be allotted 500 sq. yds. plot, but later on it was reduced to 400 sq. yds. As per the agreement, the possession was to be delivered within two year