AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
APPELLANT herein is an original complainant and against the order dated 28.1.2004 passed by District Forum, Thane dismissing his complaint that this appeal has been filed.
WE notice that the complaint has been dismissed on the point of limitation and as will be pointed out herein below that the order of the District Forum is right needing no second thought. The complainant claims to be a flat purchaser and the respondent/builders.
According to the complainant, he was put into possession of the flat by the builder on 29.10.1996, when he discovered that instead of giving him flat bearing No. 205, he was allotted flat No. 202.
THE material shows that the complainant/flat purchaser realised the same on the date, when he was put into possession on 29.10.1996. However, the complaint has been filed in the year 2000 i.e., nearly 4 years after the accrual of cause of action. In the memo of appeal, it is pleaded and so also reiterated during the course of submissions that the complainant was corresponding with the builder since 1996 and which process continued till 2000. THE law on the point is settled, by the Supreme Court, National Commission, as also by this Commission in numerous judgments, in this regard to the effect that by entering into endless correspondence, limitation period does not get enlarged. Provisions as contained under Limitation Act being an enabling provision the same have to be construed strictly since the valuable right gets accrued in favour of other party, because of lack of diligence on the part of party approaching the Forum. It is also held by entering into endless correspondence, the party cannot get time enlarged for the purpose of limitation. We are in agreement with the findings as rendered by the District Forum. ORDER 1. Appeal stands dismissed. 2. No order as to costs. 3. Office shall furnish copies of the order herein to the parties.
Appeal dismissed.