LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

KAUSHIK NARSINHBHAI PATEL & ORS. versus M/S S.J.R. PRIME CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED

Citation: [2024] 7 S.C.R. 823 · Decided: 22-07-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: C.T. RAVIKUMAR · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

[2024] 7 S.C.R. 823 : 2024 INSC 542
Kaushik Narsinhbhai Patel & Ors.  
v. 
M/s S.J.R. Prime Corporation Private Limited
(Civil Appeal No. 8176 of 2022)
22 July 2024
[C.T. Ravikumar* and Sanjay Kumar, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Whether a party whose right to file written statement is closed can 
file written submissions to introduce pleadings to resist the claim 
against it; and if not, then what is the scope of its participation of 
in the proceedings once the right to file written submissions has 
closed. Lastly, what is the impact of the forfeiture of the right to 
file a written statement.
Headnotes†
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – Developer filed written 
submissions – Defiance of earlier order of Supreme Court 
closing Developer’s right to file a written statement:
Held: The Supreme Court passed an order closing the right of 
the Respondent to file a written statement in the proceedings 
before the NCDRC, however, the Order permitted the Respondent 
to participate in the proceedings – The Respondent is bound by 
the earlier Order of the Supreme Court, and could have not been 
permitted to introduce its case through written submissions – The 
objections raised by the Respondent cannot be looked to the extent 
it carried pleadings, which could have been let in through a written 
statement. [Paras 13, 18]
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Impact of forfeiture of 
opportunity to file written statement – Party would have the 
right to participate in the proceedings and cross-examine the 
witnesses:
Held: All the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 are 
not applicable to proceedings before Consumer Forums under the 
Consumer Protection Act, 2019, except to the extent it is provided 
under Section 38(9) of the Consumer Protection Act – In the 
absence of specific provisions dealing with the consequence of 
forfeiture of the right to file a written statement, it is appropriate to 
* Author
824
[2024] 7 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
refer to the provisions in the CPC to know the general law on this 
question – Reliance placed on the Judgment in Nanda Dulal Pradhan 
& Anr. vs. Dibakar Pradhan & Anr. 2022 SCC OnLine SC 822,  
which laid down that even if the defendant/opposite party failed to 
file a written statement and, in that matter, even if forfeiture of the 
right to file written statement has occasioned, it would not disentitle 
the party from participating the proceedings before the court, without 
filing a written statement – In such circumstances, the said party 
would also be have the right to cross-examine the witness(es), if 
any, of the plaintiff/complainant – Closure of the right to file written 
statement bars the party from bringing in pleadings, indirectly to 
introduce its case. [Paras 14, 18]
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Order VI – A party cannot  
make out a case on the basis of evidence for which he has 
laid no foundation in the pleadings:
Held: Order VI Rule 1 and 2 of the CPC provide that every pleading 
shall contain only a statement of the facts, but not the evidence 
by which it is to be proved – The rigours of the rule of pleadings 
is evident from Rule 7 of Order VI, CPC, which mandates that 
‘no pleading shall, except by way of amendment, raise any new 
ground of claim or contain any allegation of fact inconsistent with 
the previous pleadings of the party pleading the same’ – Reliance 
placed on the Judgment of a Division Bench of the Karnataka 
High Court in Nalini Sunder vs. GV Sunder AIR 2003 Kar 86, 
wherein it was held that a party could not make out a case on 
the basis of evidence for which he/she has laid no foundation in 
the pleadings.[Paras 16, 17]
Civil law – Forfeiture to file written statement does not by itself 
make it obligatory to pass an order in favour of the Complainant:
Held: Even when the opposite party’s right to file a written statement 
is forfeited, that by itself, will not make it obligatory on the part 
of the NCDRC to pass an order in favour of the complainant, in 
case the complainant failed to establish its case – This power is 
to be read into the jurisdiction of a body with adjudicating power – 
There is a difference between a situation of non-filing of a written 
statement owing to forfeiture of the right to file a written statement 
and absence of denial of specific pleadings of complainant in the 
written statement. In the latter case, absence of denial of specific 
pleadings on facts they can be taken as admitted. [Para 19]
[2024]

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.