- (1.) THE original complainant, being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order passed by Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kachchh in Misc. Application No. 16 of 2010 dated 14.9.2010 whereby the complaint of the complainant came to be dismissed, has filed this appeal. For the sake of convenience, the parties to this appeal are hereinafter referred to by their original nomenclature.
(2.) SHORT facts of the case are that complainant's Bajaj Pulsar was stolen on 20.5.2006. The claim form was filled in and submitted to the opponent Insurance Company. In spite of repeated inquires by the complainant, the claim was neither settled nor repudiated. The vehicle was stolen on 20.5.2006 but the complaint was filed before the Forum on 9.3.2010 with application for condonation of delay. The District Forum observed in para 5 of its order that there is gross delay in filing the complaint and the complainant's application Exh. 5 was dismissed at the stage of admission.
(3.) PROCESS was issued and duly served. We have heard the learned Advocates for the parties. The learned Advocate of the complainant had cited two judgments before this Commission on the point of limitation viz. (1) United India Insurance Company Limited v. R.Pyarelal Import and Export Ltd., 2010 1 CPJ 22 and (2) Govindbhai Tejabhai Ahir v. The New India Assurance Company Limited, Appeal No. 301 of 2009 rendered by CDRC, Gujarat State. The complainant's main argument is that when there is no repudiation, the cause of action is continuous and the complaint is not time -barred.;