- (1.) Leave granted. The questions which arise for consideration in this appeal arc whether District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jhajjar (for short, 'the District Forum') committed a jurisdictional error by entertaining and allowing the complaint filed by the Respondent ignoring the objection of limitation raised by the Appellants and whether Stale Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Union Territory, Chandigarh (for short, 'the State Commission') and the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short, 'the National Commission') committed grave error by dismissing the appeal and the revision filed by the Appellants against the order of the District Forum.
(2.) The Respondent was allotted industrial plot No. 115, Phase I, Bahadurgarh subject to the terms and conditions embodied in allotment letter dated 8.2.1978. Due to the Respondent's failure to raise construction within the stipulated period, Estate Officer, Haryana Urban Development Authority, Bahadurgarh (Appellant No. 3) issued notices under various Sub-sections of Section 17 of the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977 and cancelled the allotment vide order dated 11.7.1995.
(3.) After almost six years of the cancellation of allotment, the Respondent filed a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, 'the 1986 Act') and prayed for setting aside the order of cancellation and for issue of a direction to Appellant No. 3 to restore the possession. In the written statement filed on behalf of the Appellants, a preliminary objection was taken to the maintainability of the complaint on the ground that the same was barred by time. The Appellants also pleaded that after cancellation of the Respondent's allotment, plot No. 115 was allotted to M/s. Janta Products Co. in March 1999, which had already started construction.;