| Headnote |
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – s. 13(2)(a) – District Forum to extend the time for filing of response to the complaint beyond the period of 15 days, in addition to 30 days – Power of – Held: A bare reading of s. 13(2)(a) of the Act makes it clear that the copy of the complaint which is to be sent to the opposite party, is to be with the direction to give his version of (or response to) the case (or complaint) within a period of 30 days – It further provides that such period of 30 days can be extended by the District Forum, but not beyond 15 days – The legislature in its wisdom has provided for filing of complaint or appeals beyond the period specified under the relevant provisions of the Act and Regulations, if there is sufficient cause given by the party, which has to be to the satisfaction of the concerned authority – No such discretion has been provided for u/s. 13(2)(a) of the Act for filing a response to the complaint beyond the extended period of 45 days (30 days plus 15 days) – By specifically enacting a provision under sub-section(3) of s. 13 with a specific clarification that violation of the principles of natural justice shall not be called in question where the procedure prescribed under sub-sections (1) and (2) of s. 13 of the Consumer Protection Act has been followed or complied with, the intention of the legislature is clear that mere denial of further extension of time for filing the response (by the opposite party) would not amount to denial or violation of the principles of natural justice – This provision of s. 13(3) reinforces the time limit specified in s. 13(2)(a) of the Act – Therefore, the intention of the legislature is absolutely clear that the provision of s. 13(2)(a) of the Act in specifying the time limit for filing the response to the complaint is mandatory, and not directoryConsumer Protection Act, 1986 – s. 13(2) – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Or. VIII, r.1 – It was contended that the language of s. 13(2) of the Consumer Protection Act is pari materia to Or. VIII, r. 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and if time can be extended for filing of written submissions in a suit under the aforesaid provision of the Code, the same would apply to the filing of response to a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act as well, and hence the provision of s. 13(2)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act would be directory and not mandatory – Held: It is noteworthy that Or. VIII, r. 1 r/w. Or. VIII, r. 10 prescribes that the maximum period of 120 days provided u/or. VIII, r. 1 is actually not meant to be mandatory but only directory – Or. VIII, r. 10 mandates that where written statement is not filed within the time provided u/or. VIII, r. 1 “ The Court shall pronounce the judgment against him or make such order in relation to the suit as it thinks fit” – It is clearly indicative of the fact that the discretions is left with the Court to grant time beyond the maximum period of 120 days, which may be in exceptional cases – It is pertinent to note that non-filing of written statement u/or. VIII, r. 1 of the Code is not followed by any consequence within the time so provided in the Code – Whereas, sub-section (2)(b)(ii) of s. 13 of the Consumer Protection Act clearly provides for the consequence of the complaint to be proceeded exparte against the opposite party, if the opposite party omits or fails to represent his case within the time given – Once consequences are provided for not filing the response to the complaint within the time specified, and it is further provided that proceedings complying with the procedure laid down under sub section (1) and (2) of s. 13 of the Consumer Protection Act shall not be called in question in any court on the ground that the principles of natural justice have not been complied with, the intention of the legislature is absolutely clear that the provisions of s.13(2)(a) of the Act in specifying the time limit for filing the response to the complaint is mandatory, and not directory – The provisions of Or.VIII, r.1 of the Code are directory not mandatory, however, it would not be applicable to cases dealing with the provisions of s. 13(2) of the Consumer Protection Act, or such other enactment wherein a provision akin to s.13(2) is there and the consequences are also provided.Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – s. 13 – Limitation of 30 days u/s. 13 of the 1986 Act – Commencing point of – Held: Sub- sections(2) (a) and (2)(b) of s. 13 of the Consumer Protection Act specify that it is a copy of the complaint which is to be given to the opposite party directing him to give his version of the case within a period of 30 days or such extended period, not exceeding 15 days – As such, from the aforesaid provision itself, it is clear that it is the copy of the admitted complaint which is to be served, after which the period to file the response would commence – Further, Regulation 10 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005 also specified the procedure of issuing notice, which should be accompanied by copy of the complaint – Therefore, the commencing point of limitation of 30 days u/s. 13 of the Consumer Protection Act would be from the date of receipt of the notice accompanied with the complaint by the opposite party, and not mere receipt of the notice of the complaint |
