1. The complainant filed the present complaint against the respondent stating that he was running Rehman Service Station at Crown Cinema Near Muslim Commercial Bank Gujranwala for which he purchased one lift for raising the vehicle from the respondent for Rs.1,20,000/- and the respondent gave a guarantee of the lift for 10 years but the lift mentioned above became out of order within 3 months of purchase upon which he made a compliant to respondent which was got checked and received Rs.15,000/- as a repair charges from him which he paid in the presence of Liaqat Ali Butt S/o Muhammad Ali R/o Saddiqe Colony Gujrnawala and Muhammad Arfan caste Mughal R/o Crown Cinema Chowk Gujranwala and when the lift was handed over to him after repair but after some time when he raised the vehicle then the vehicle at once fell down and all the oil of Rs.9000/- were wasted which was due to the negligence of respondent. He further stated that when he contacted the respondent, the respondent used to delay the matter and ultimately he filed an application before District Consumer Protection Council Gujranwala but his grievances could not be redressed and claimed damages against the respondent.
2. Respondent was summoned who appeared in the Court through his counsel and submitted his written reply and raised preliminary objection regarding limitation, maintainability, malafide and special cost. On fact he stated that complainant purchased disputed lift in March 2005 and no guarantee was given to the complainant. The list had been working in good condition for the last 5 years and 8 months then the complainant filed the complaint before District Consumer Protection Council Gujranwala for which the lift was repaired and Rs.35000/- were spent on the repair out of which Rs.15000/- was received from complainant and remaining Rs.20000/- was incurred by him despite of the fact that there was no liability on his shoulders for the repair of lift. Now the complainant filed this petition just to blackmail and harass him, therefore, liable to be dismissed.
3. Subsequently, the respondent did not appear in the Court and as such he was proceeded exparte. In exparte evidence complainant produced Shahid Mehmood as PW1 and himself appeared as PW2. Both the witnesses supported contents of the complaint. He also produced a copy of receipt Exh. "P1" in his support.
4. It is evident from Exh. "P1" that complainant purchased the lift from the respondent in March 2005 but the complainant filed the complaint on 09-03-10 which is indicative of facts that the complainant filed the complaint after the lapse of 5 years after the purchase of the lift and after 4 years and 9 months from the fault of the lift. The conduct of complainant shows that he was negligent in the prosecution of respondent. The law provides 30 days for availing the remedy from this Court from the accrual of cause of action. The complainant should have been filed the complaint within 30 days from actual accrual of cause of action i.e when lift became out of order after 3 months of its purchase. Therefore, I hold the complaint is hopeless barred by time and is therefore, dismissed.