M/S. SS GROUP PVT. LTD. versus AADITIYA J. GARG & ANR.

Citation: [2020] 13 S.C.R. 779 · Decided: 17-12-2020 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: VINEET SARAN, S. RAVINDRA BHAT · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
779
M/s. SS GROUP PVT. LTD.
v.
AADITIYA J. GARG & ANR.
(Civil Appeal Nos. 4085 of 2020)
DECEMBER 17, 2020
[VINEET SARAN AND S. RAVINDRA BHAT, JJ.]
Consumer Protection Act, 1986: s.38 – Deficiency in service
– Respondents booked flats with the appellant-builder – Flats were
not delivered on time – Consumer complaint filed before National
Commission claiming refund of money – Notices issued in June 2020
and received by the appellant on 13 July 2020 – Written statement/
reply filed by appellant on 31 August 2020 which was beyond the
period of 45 days – National Commission declined to take the written
statement on record on the ground that Consumer Court has no
power to extend the time for filing the response to the complaint
beyond 45 days – Held: It is true that written statement cannot be
allowed to be filed beyond the period of 45 days as per s.38 of the
Act – However, in the wake of Covid 19 pandemic, on 23 March
2020, Supreme Court in Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation,
had passed an order granting extension of period of limitation in
all proceedings irrespective of limitation prescribed under the general
law or special laws whether condonable or not w.e.f. 15 March
2020 till further orders – It is admitted fact that the period of
limitation of 30 days to file the written statement had expired on 12
August 2020 and the extended period of 15 days expired on 27
August 2020 – This period expired when order dated 23 March
2020 was continuing – In view thereof, the limitation for filing written
statement in the present proceedings before National Commission
would be deemed to have been extended as order dated 23 March
2020 made extended period of limitation applicable to all petitions/
applications/suits/appeals and all other proceedings – As such delay
of four days in filing written statement in the pending proceedings
before the National Commission is allowed.
[2020] 13 S.C.R. 779
779
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
780
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 13 S.C.R.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4085
of 2020.
From the Judgment and Order dated 07.09.2020 of the National
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in I.A. No. 5276
of 2020 in C.C. No. 488 of 2020.
With
Civil Appeal Nos. 4086, 4087, 4088, 4089, 4090, 4091, 4092, 4093
of 2020.
Sanjay K. Shandilya, Apoorva Agarwal, Abhishek, Mushtaq
Ahmad, Advs. for the Appellant.
Naveen Kumar, Adv. for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was passed:
ORDER
Leave granted.
This batch of civil appeals has been filed by the appellant/builder
challenging the order dated 07.09.2020 passed by the the National
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (“the National
Commission”, for short).
The respondents herein had booked the flats with the appellant
and since the flats were allegedly not delivered on time, the respondents
filed Consumer Complaints before the National Commission claiming
refund of money.
The notices in each of the complaint petitions were issued by the
National Commission in June 2020 and were received by the appellant
on 13.07.2020 in each of complaint cases.
It is submitted that as per Section 38(2)(a) of the Consumer
Protection Act, 2019, 30 days time is provided for filing written statement,
which could be extended for a further period of 15 days. In the present
matter, the period of 30 days expired on 12.08.2020 and extended period
of 15 days expired on 27.08.2020.
Admittedly, the written statement/reply was filed by the appellant
before the National Commission on 31.08.2020, which filing was beyond
the period of 45 days. The National Commission thus declined to take
the written statement on record in view of the Constitution Bench decision
of this Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hilli Multipurpose
Cold Storage (P) Ltd.,(2020) 5 SCC 757, wherein it has been held that
the Consumer Court has no power to extend the time for filing the
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
781
response to the complaint beyond 45 days. Said decision of the National
Commission is presently under challenge in these appeals.
We have heard Mr. Sanjay K. Shandilya, learned counsel
appearing for the appellant and Mr. Naveen Kumar, learned counsel
appearing for the respondents on caveat.
Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the respondents
do not wish to file counter affidavit and, therefore, these appeals be
disposed of.
With the assistance of the learned counsel for both the sides, we
have carefully perused the record.
It is true that the de
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.