Summary
Applications to condone delay in filing a written statement before a consumer forum that were pending or decided before 04.03.2020, when the Constitution Bench decided New India Assurance v. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage, must be decided on merits and not summarily rejected. The NCDRC orders closing the opposite parties' right to file written statements were set aside and the condonation applications were remitted for decision on merits.
Issues
- Whether the NCDRC could close the opposite party's right to file a written statement under Section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, by an order passed before 04.03.2020, without deciding the application for condonation of delay on merits.
- What effect the prospective operation of the Constitution Bench decision in New India Assurance v. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage (2020), read with Diamond Exports, has on condonation applications pending or decided before 04.03.2020.
Provisions considered
- Section 13, Consumer Protection Act, 1986The section governs the period for the opposite party to file its version (30 days from notice, extendable up to a maximum of 45 days). The Constitution Bench held the time limit mandatory but only prospectively from 04.03.2020. The Court held that the NCDRC orders of 22.07.2016 (Vijay Dixit) and 22.08.2013 (New India Assurance, in the companion judgment), which forfeited the right to file a written statement, had to give way to a decision on merits of the condonation applications. (¶¶ 1, 2.9, 3, 4)
Held
- In New India Assurance v. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage (2020) 5 SCC 757, the Constitution Bench held that the time limit in Section 13 is mandatory but applies prospectively. Diamond Exports v. United India Insurance (three Judges) held that Daddy's Builders does not affect condonation applications pending or decided before 04.03.2020. Such applications get the benefit of Mampee Timbers, which allows a consumer forum to accept a late written statement in an appropriate case on suitable terms. (¶¶ 2.9, 2.10, 2.11, 2.12)
- These decisions settle the question. An application to condone delay in filing a written statement made to a consumer forum before 04.03.2020 must be decided on merits and must not be dismissed summarily. (¶ 4)
- The NCDRC order of 22.07.2016 in Consumer Complaint No. 280 of 2015 (a medical negligence claim, with the written statement filed 285 days late) was passed before 04.03.2020. It was set aside and the condonation application remitted for decision on merits. (¶¶ 2.3, 3, 5)
- The companion judgment, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. (C.A. Nos. 10941-10942 of 2013, with its own paragraph numbers), reached the same result. The NCDRC orders of 22.08.2013 and 30.09.2013 were set aside, the condonation application was remitted, and the Rs. 45 lakh deposited in this Court was to be moved with accrued interest to an interest-bearing fixed deposit with the NCDRC, subject to the outcome of the complaint.
Result
Appeals allowed. The impugned NCDRC orders were set aside and the NCDRC directed to decide the applications for condonation of delay in filing the written statements on merits. In the New India Assurance appeals, the deposited amount with accrued interest is to be transferred to the NCDRC and kept in a fixed deposit subject to the final outcome. No order as to costs.