Consumer Dispute Deadline: The 45-Day Deadline You Can’t Afford to Miss – Here’s Why

As a business owner or individual facing a consumer dispute, timely action is critical. Many first-timers miss the consumer dispute deadline to file the response after receiving the Court’s notice and complaint copy in a consumer complaint. They wrongly believe they will hire an advocate just before the next hearing date to represent them before the Consumer Commission, and the advocate will be able to manage the response written statement deadline. However, this delayed approach frequently results in losing the right to file a response to the complaint, leading to the right of defence being struck off. Once your right to file the response is closed, obtaining relief is impossible.

To provide you with a more in-depth understanding, we have also created a detailed YouTube video on “NCDRC Written Statement Timeline – Why Timely Filing is Crucial in Consumer Disputes.” 

Watch the video below, where you will know the strict 45-day deadline to file your written statement is essential to avoid losing your right to defend. Missing the written statement deadline can strike off your defense, leading to a one-sided decision.

Now that you have gained a visual and practical understanding of NCDRC Written Statement Deadline through our YouTube video, let’s dive deeper into legal analysis. 

To enhance your reading experience, we have included a Table of Contents below for easy navigation.

Supreme Court’s Ruling on the Consumer Dispute Deadline

A landmark judgment by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, delivered on March 4, 2020, in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd., addressed two important legal questions for consumer disputes:

1.     Is the timeline to file a response under Section 13(2) of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (“1986 Act”) mandatory or directory?

2.     When does the limitation period for filing the response commence under Section 13(2) of the 1986 Act?

It is clarified that these provisions apply equally to the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (the “2019 Act”), as sub-section 38(3) mirrors sub-section 13(2) of the 1986 Act.

First Question: Mandatory Nature of Timeline to File a Response

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has categorically stated that missing the consumer dispute deadline, as disclosed in sub-section 13(2) of the 1986 Act, can lead to severe outcomes. For example, as per sub­-section 13(2)(b)(ii), if the opponent fails to file the response to the complaint within the mandatory 30 days or 15-day extension (if granted), the complaint may be decided solely on the complainant’s evidence, without considering your defence.

Simply put, your side of the story won’t be taken on record if you don’t file the response within 45 days of receiving the notice.

Additionally, under sub-section 13(3) of the 1986 Act, if you miss the written statement deadline, you lose the right to claim later that the process was unfair or that you were not given enough time to respond. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has clarified that once the window for filing a response closes, the law does not permit any leniency based on claims of insufficient time or violations of natural justice principles. The Court emphasized that the timeline—30 days with an optional 15-day extension—is sufficient to file a response. Beyond this, the law leaves no room for flexibility. While the Court acknowledged that meeting these deadlines might be challenging in some cases, it firmly stated that any hardship faced by the opponent must be secondary to the Act’s objective: fast and effective resolution of consumer disputes.

Second Question: Starting Point of the Limitation Period

Further, while addressing the second question of law, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has clarified that the 30-day limitation period to file a response begins only after the opponent receives both the notice and the copy of the complaint. The Hon’ble Supreme Court made the following findings:

1.      Sub-section 13(2)(a) and (2)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986: These sections explicitly state that the opponent must be provided with a copy of the complaint along with the notice, directing them to submit their version of the case within 30 days. The 30-day period begins only after the receipt of these documents.

2.      Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005: Regulation 10 reinforces this requirement, specifying that the notice must be accompanied by copies of the complaint, grounds of appeal, petitions, and other relevant documents. Regulation 10(5) mandates that all necessary documents must be served upon the opponent for the timeline to commence.

3.      Parallels with the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC): The Hon’ble Supreme Court referred to Order VIII Rule 1 of the CPC, which similarly requires that a written statement must be filed within 30 days from receiving the “summons.” Summons, as defined in Order V Rule 1, must be accompanied by a copy of the plaint and related documents. This ensures that the defendant (or opponent) has all the necessary information to prepare their response.

Objection to Non-Receipt of Complaint Copy

If you, as the opponent, have not received a copy of the complaint along with the notice, it is imperative to raise this objection on the very first date of appearance. The Supreme Court made it clear that failure to do so would forfeit your right to object later.

Implications of the Supreme Court’s Judgment on the 45-Day Limit

In its judgment dated 04.03.2020, the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruled that the strict 45-day deadline for filing a written statement under Section 13(2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, will only apply moving forward and not retroactively. This means that if a delay beyond 45 days occurred in the past and an application to condone the delay was filed before 04.03.2020, the strict rule will not automatically apply to those cases. However, this does not mean consumer forums can condone delays beyond 45 days by default. Each case will still be decided based on its specific facts and circumstances. However, for the consumer complaints, where the opponent failed to meet the 45-day deadline to file the response after the pronouncement of the judgement, the opponent has no right to seek condonation of delay for any additional time beyond the 45 days. The Consumer forums are bound to enforce this written statement deadline strictly, leaving no room for extensions beyond the permitted period.

CONCLUSION

This judgement highlights the importance of proper service to the opponents. The Complainants must ensure that notices are adequately served with a copy of the complaint to start the limitation period. If the opponent fails to file a timely response, the complainant must be prepared to present evidence efficiently to seek the final order in its favour.

On the other hand, the opponents must understand that the timeline to file the response is sacrosanct. They must avoid delaying the engagement of legal counsel and ensure that the written statement is filed within 45 days, along with an application seeking condonation of delay (if filed beyond 30 days) to safeguard their defence.

This judgment underscores the importance of procedural discipline in consumer disputes and balances the rights of both complainants and opponents to ensure swift and effective justice.

For business owners and legal professionals—how do you ensure compliance with response deadlines? Drop your insights!

Download PDF – Supreme Court Judgment

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd.

Disclaimer: In compliance with the Bar Council of India guidelines, this article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or a solicitation for legal services.