IMPORTANT POINT
Discretion for condonation of delay under Section 13 of Consumer Protection Act,1986 is specifically circumscribed by Statute.

JUDGMENT :

DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.

1. This appeal arises from a judgment dated 25 February 2020 of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission¹ [“NCDRC”].

2. While entertaining I.A. Nos. 15390 of 2019, 15391 of 2019 and 18307 of 2019 in Consumer Complaint No. 2645 of 2018, the NCDRC has condoned the delay of 100 days in filing a written statement. The order of the NCDRC was a few days before the judgment of a Constitution Bench dated 4 March 2020, in New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Private Limited, (2020) 5 SCC 757, which held that the limitation period under Section 13(2)² [“The District Forum shall, if the complaint 54[admitted] by it under Section 12 relates to goods in respect of which the procedure specified in sub-section (1) cannot be followed, or if the complaint relates to any services: (a) refer a copy of such complaint to the opposite party directing him to give his version of the case within a period of thirty days or such extended period not exceeding fifteen days as may be granted by the District Forum; (b) where the opposite party, on receipt of a copy of the complaint, referred to him under clause (a) denies or disputes the allegations contained in the complaint, or omits or fails to take any action to represent his case within the time given by the District Forum, the District Forum shall proceed to settle the consumer dispute: (i) on the basis of evidence brought to its notice by the complainant and the opposite party, where the opposite party denies or disputes the allegations contained in the complaint and (ii) ex-parte on the basis of evidence brought to its notice by the complainant where the opposite party omits or fails to take any action to represent his case within the time given by the Forum and (c) where the complainant fails to appear on the date of hearing before the District Forum, the District Forum may either dismiss the complaint for default or decide it on merits.”] of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 could not be extended beyond the statutorily prescribed period of forty-five days.

3. The appellants filed a consumer complaint before the NCDRC on 3 December 2018 based on two insurance policies. The claim is on the ground of an alleged fire that took place at the factory of the appellant. On 6 December 2018, the NCDRC passed the following order:

“Heard. Complaint is admitted, subject to just exceptions.

Issue notice to Opposite Parties under Section 13(2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 making it clear that if the Opposite Parties wish to contest the allegations in the Complaint, they may file the Written Statements within 30 days of the receipt of notice in the Complaint, failing which their right to file Written Statement may be closed.”

4. The respondent received the summons on 20 May 2019 together with the order of the NCDRC and a complete set of papers consisting of the consumer complaint and documents. The respondent filed its written statement on 23 September 2019 together with I.A. No. 15390 of 2019 for condonation of a delay of 100 days. The appellant filed I.A. No. 15391 of 2019 for the dismissal of the complaint.

5. On 26 September 2019, the NCDRC permitted the appellants to file their reply to the respondent’s application for condoning the delay. The appellants contested the respondent’s application for condonation of delay. The NCDRC, by its order dated 25 February 2020, condoned the delay subject to the respondent paying costs of Rs. 50,000.

6. Mr Salil Paul, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, has submitted that given the judgment of the Constitution Bench in New India Assurance Company Limited (supra), a delay in excess of the period which is stipulated in Section 13(1)(a) read with Section 13(2)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, i.e. thirty days extendable by fifteen days, could not have been condoned. The provisions of Section 13 are made applicable to proceedings before the NCDRC by Section 22.

7. On th