MADAN LAL SURYAVANSHI Vs. SHAHRUKH PASI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against impugned order dated 29.08.2013 passed by the learned State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (in short, 'the State Commission') in Appeal No. 734 of 2009 Madan Lal Suryavanshi Vs. Shahrukh Pasi & Ors., by which while dismissing the appeal, order of the District Forum dismissing the complaint was upheld.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the complainant/petitioner purchased a Tata Tempo in the year 2005 and got it financed from opposite party No.4-ICICI Bank. Vehicle was taken away by some anti-social elements on 04.02.2006 and FIR was lodged. Alleging deficiency on the part of the opposite party, complainant filed complaint before the District Forum on 16.12.2008. Opposite parties resisted complaint and submitted that the complaint is time barred and prayed for dismissal of the complaint. Learned District Forum after hearing both the parties dismissed the complaint as barred by limitation as well on merits. Appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by learned State Commission vide impugned order against which this revision petition has been filed.

(3.) Heard petitioner in person at admission stage and perused record.