M/S DADDY’S BUILDERS PVT. LTD. & ANOTHER versus MANISHA BHARGAVA AND ANOTHER

M/S DADDY’S BUILDERS PVT. LTD. & ANOTHER versus MANISHA BHARGAVA AND ANOTHER

The Constitution Bench decision reaffirming J.J. Merchant establishes that consumer fora lack jurisdiction to accept written statements beyond the statutory limit of 45 days under Section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986; Reliance (2017) did not impose a mandate to accept such delayed statements in all cases and the National Commission correctly upheld the State Commission's refusal to condone the delay on merits.

Parties
Petitioner: M/S DADDY’S BUILDERS PVT. LTD. & ANOTHER; Respondent: MANISHA BHARGAVA AND ANOTHER
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
11 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Special Leave Petition (civil) / Dismissed by Supreme Court
Outcome
Special Leave Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Condonation of Delay, Extension of Time, Jurisdiction of Consumer Fora, Prospective Application
Consumer Protection Civil Procedure Condonation of Delay Extension of Time Jurisdiction of Consumer Fora Prospective Application

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M/S DADDY’S BUILDERS PVT. LTD. & ANOTHER

Petitioner

MANISHA BHARGAVA AND ANOTHER

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Special Leave Petition (civil) / Dismissed by Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether consumer fora have jurisdiction to accept written statements beyond 45 days under Section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
  2. 2 Whether the Constitution Bench decision in New India Assurance v. Hilli (2020) applies prospectively to cases/condonation applications pending before the decision
  3. 3 Scope and effect of Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. M/s Mampee Timbers & Hardwares Pvt. Ltd. (2017) on acceptance of delayed written statements

Ratio Decidendi

The Constitution Bench decision reaffirming J.J. Merchant establishes that consumer fora lack jurisdiction to accept written statements beyond the statutory limit of 45 days under Section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986; Reliance (2017) did not impose a mandate to accept such delayed statements in all cases and the National Commission correctly upheld the State Commission's refusal to condone the delay on merits.

Court Disposition

Special Leave Petition dismissed

Orders

  • Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 1240 of 2021 dismissed
  • Impugned order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission dated 04.09.2020 upholding the State Commission order dated 26.09.2018 is upheld