The limitation period for filing a written statement under the Consumer Protection Act (30 days plus a discretionary 15-day extension) is peremptory. District Commissions cannot condone delays beyond this 45-day limit, regardless of administrative issues like bench vacancy.

J U D G M E N T

Per Nagesh.C.Kumbre, Hon’ble Member.

1. This revision petition has been preferred under Section 47 (1) (b) of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 (in short, the C.P.A.) against the order dated 11.12.2023 passed by the District Commission Aurangabad, (in short, the District Commission) rejecting the application of revision petitioner with a prayer to accept its written statement on record in consumer complaint C.C.No. 613/2023.

2. The facts relevant for the disposal of the present revision petition are that, the Consumer Complaint C.C. No. 613/2023 under section 35 of the C.P.A. was filed by present respondent no.1, who is original complainant wherein present revision petitioner is opponent no.1 and respondent no.2 is opponent no.2 before the District Commission. The complaint was admitted on 22.11.2022. Petitioner was appeared before the District Commission on 31.01.2023 and matter was fixed for filing the written statement of opponents on 08.03.2023. On 08.03.2023 and thereafter till November 2023, there was no bench formation at the District Commission therefore present matter was posted on 11.12.2023. On 11.12.2023 petitioner present before the District Commission along with an application with a prayer to accept their written statement on record. The said application was rejected by the District Commission on 11.12.2023 as the written statement filed by petitioner was not within limitation. Therefore revision petitioner filed this revision petition against the impugned order dated 11.12.2023. Petitioner filed copy of application dated 11.12.2023, copy of impugned order and rojnama, copy of complaint etc.

3. Adv. S.S.Rathi for revision petitioner and Adv. R.V.Jadhav for respondent no.1 were appeared. Respondent no.2 was duly served but not given their appearance before this Commission therefore as per order dated 23.06.2025 the revision petition is proceeded ex-parte against the respondent no. 2. Heard both advocate.

4. We have gone through the impugned order, entire record of the revision petition and also thoughtfully consider the arguments. It appears from record that, petitioner was appeared before the District Commission on 31.01.2023 and matter was posted for filing the written statement on 08.03.2023. On 11.12.2023 petitioner appeared before the District Commission along with an application praying for taking their written statement on record but the said application was rejected by the District Commission, and proceeded the complaint without written statement of petitioner vide order dated 11.12.2023 below Ex.-1, as the written statement was not within the limitation of 45 days, as per the provisions of C.P. Act. It is submitted by petitioner that, there is no bench formation till November 2023 therefore petitioner could not file their written statement on 08.03.2023. However we are not agreeing with this submission of petitioner. Though there was no bench formation at the District Commission, but the petitioner was not prevented to file the written statement before the Registry of the District Commission within limitation.

5. The provisions for filing the written version by opposite party is envisaged in Section 38 (2) (a) and 38 (3) (a), of C.P. Act, as refer a copy of 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 District Commission. Therefore it is mandated by the above provision that the limitation period for