ORDER D. P. Wadhwa, President: - It is the complainant who is petitioner before us. Though he succeeded before the District Forum on a complaint filed by him but the State Commission non-suited him though he also filed an appeal against the order of the District Forum. Complainant is not the original purchaser of the plot of land sold by the respondent, H.P. Housing Board. He purchased the plot from the original allottee in 1988. He states that it was a malba ground and he had to spend Rs.1,50,000/- to put it in shape for construction of the house that was in the year 1989. Complaint was filed in December, 1997. State Commission took into account the question of limitation and also found that no evidence was led that complainant has spent the money. State Commission, therefore, held that the matter could be decided by the Civil Court. We do not find it a fit case to exercise our jurisdiction under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Revision petition is dismissed. In case petitioner chooses to file a suit he will be entitled to apply for exclusion of time spent before this Commission under Section 14 of the Limitation Act in view of the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Laxmi Engg. Works v. P.S.G. Industrial Instituted, 1995(3) SCC 583.