Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Consumer Protection Act 2019 does not explicitly codify striking off pleadings, but forums apply CPC provisions (Order VI Rule 16) mutatis mutandis via inherent powers, as affirmed in judgments; available but not wholesale for joint pleadings. No sources contradict availability under CPA 2019 procedures. ["Preetha, D/o. Rajam VS Hareesh Kumar, S/o Rajan Achari - Kerala"]
In consumer disputes, procedural fairness is key, but the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (CPA 2019) prioritizes speedy resolutions over rigid adversarial tactics. A common question arises: whether strike off pleadings in Consumer Protection Act 2019 available? This post delves into the legal landscape, examining if consumer forums can strike off pleadings like under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), and highlights the Act's focus on inclusion and efficiency.
Drawing from judicial interpretations and procedural guidelines, we'll explore why such a remedy is absent, the role of ex-parte orders, and practical insights for parties. Note: This is general information based on available precedents; consult a legal professional for case-specific advice.
Under the CPA 2019, there is no provision or practice for striking off pleadings. The Act's framework emphasizes summary proceedings for quick consumer redressal, diverging from CPC tools like Order 6 Rule 16, which allows striking scandalous or frivolous pleadings. Instead, forums adopt a protective stance on participation. Saint-Gobain India Pvt. Ltd. VS Deepak Achuthan S/o Achuthan - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 314
The closest remedy for non-compliance—such as failing to file counter pleadings—is an ex-parte order under Section 38(3)(b). However, this is narrowly applied and not automatic. Courts have clarified: even if a party fails to file their version, as long as they continue to represent their case in any manner, they cannot be subjected to an ex-parte order under the statute. Saint-Gobain India Pvt. Ltd. VS Deepak Achuthan S/o Achuthan - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 314
In one pivotal ruling, courts set aside ex-parte orders denying participation: The court allowed the writ petitions and set aside the impugned orders to the limited extent that it declined permission to the petitioners to take part in the proceedings, including by advancing arguments at the final stage and cross-examining the witnesses, even though they had not filed their counter versions within time. Saint-Gobain India Pvt. Ltd. VS Deepak Achuthan S/o Achuthan - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 314
Section 38 outlines complaint procedures: complainants file first, opposite parties respond within stipulated time. Non-filing triggers potential ex-parte proceedings, but forums must assess ongoing representation. This participatory ethos prevents harsh exclusions, unlike civil courts.
District Commissions cannot proceed ex-parte solely for late filings if parties engage otherwise. This approach aligns with CPA's quasi-judicial, consumer-friendly nature. Saint-Gobain India Pvt. Ltd. VS Deepak Achuthan S/o Achuthan - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 314
No precedents or statutory text reference strike off, striking out, or equivalent powers in CPA 2019. Forums handle deficient pleadings through evidence evaluation and arguments, not deletion. Related cases reinforce this:
Other rulings highlight CPA 2019's procedural leniency and focus on merits:
These cases illustrate CPA's ethos: inclusion unless total non-representation, supporting no-strike norms. Kotak Mahindra Life Insuraance Co. Ltd. VS Anu LambaNirmal Satwant Singh VS VSR Infratech Private Limited
In insurance repudiations, late written statements were excluded only post-limitation, but claims proceeded on merits. District Commission not erred in not taking WS filed by appellant on record after 45 days of period of limitation. Kotak Mahindra Life Insuraance Co. Ltd. VS Anu Lamba
The CPA 2019 does not provide for striking off pleadings, favoring participatory, speedy justice under Section 38(3)(b). Ex-parte orders are limited, ensuring no party is unfairly excluded for procedural slips. This consumer-centric approach, backed by cases like Saint-Gobain India Pvt. Ltd. VS Deepak Achuthan S/o Achuthan - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 314, promotes fair resolutions without CPC rigidity.
Key Takeaways:- No strike-off remedy exists; focus on participation. Saint-Gobain India Pvt. Ltd. VS Deepak Achuthan S/o Achuthan - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 314- Late pleadings allow arguments/cross-examination. Saint-Gobain India Pvt. Ltd. VS Deepak Achuthan S/o Achuthan - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 314- Act prioritizes efficacy over technicalities. Georgekutty VS State of Kerala - 1993 0 Supreme(Ker) 114
For tailored guidance, engage a consumer law expert. Stay informed on evolving precedents for effective forum navigation.
#CPA2019, #ConsumerRights, #LegalInsights
As manifest from the afore extracted portion in the judgment, the learned Bench has postulated that even where the statutorily prescribed criteria may not be available under Order VI Rule 16 of the CPC, a Court can still strike off defence/pleadings of a party - when he/she is established to have violated ... The singular question before us is whether, pleadings which are filed jointly and in common, should be struck off in its toto - namely even that of those respond....
It was a case coming under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. ... The District Commission ought to have found that Section 69 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and Section 24(A) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is one and the same. So misquoting a provision would not tantamount to change of the intention of the applicant. 6. ... Section 69 of the Consumer Protection....
remedies under RERA and the Consumer Protection Act. ... From the two decisions referred to by us, it is crystal clear that, remedies available to the consumers under the Consumer Protection Consumer Protection Act and the RERA Act neither excludesup id
Chahit Bansal, Advocate JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY, PRESIDENT : The Applicant Gurmail Singh has filed the present Transfer Application under Section 48 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 for transfer of Consumer Complaint No.51 of 2023 titled as “Gurmail Singh Vs. ... …..Respondents/Opposite Parties Transfer Application under Section 48 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Quorum:- Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary, President Ms.....
Chahit Bansal, Advocate JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY, PRESIDENT : The Applicant Gurmail Singh has filed the present Transfer Application under Section 48 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 for transfer of Consumer Complaint No.51 of 2023 titled as “Gurmail Singh ... …..Respondents/Opposite Parties Transfer Application under Section 48 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Quorum:- Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary, President Ms. .......
prescribed in the statute to ensure expeditious disposal of consumer complaints, which is the very object and ethos of the Consumer Protection Act 2019. ... Protection Act 2019 and secondly, there was no error apparent on record of the District Commission. ... However, we direct the District Commission concerned to strictly apply the provisions of Section 38(2)(a) of Consumer Protection Act #HL_ST....
Consumer Protection Act, 2019. ... The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 which came into force w.e.f. 20.07.2020, would be applicable to any cause of action after the enactment of the Act. Therefore, the present Complaint could only be filed under Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Relying on the Judgment passed by this Commission in “M. ... The Consumer#HL_EN....
Thus, the cases pending or adjudicated and rights/obligations created before the coming into effect of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 will continue to be adjudicated under the Old Act i.e. Consumer Protection Act, 1986. ... Taking into account the aforesaid discussion, we conclude that the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 is prospective in nature. ... The same can be gauged throu....
This landmark judgment brought housing construction under the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. ... A copy of this Order be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 1986/2019. The Order be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties. 19. ... So in our view, such type of case is not tenable and maintainable in the Consumer Fora / Commission and this type of....
Thus, the cases pending or adjudicated and rights/obligations created before the coming into effect of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 will continue to be adjudicated under the Old Act i.e. Consumer Protection Act, 1986. ... Taking into account the aforesaid discussion, I conclude that the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 is prospective in nature. ... The same can be gauged throug....
2. The short facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the respondents are a partnership firm that owned the building named "Madhav Baug" in the village of Andheri, Mumbai. The complainants were tenants in two flats on the ground floor in Building-A. The former decided to demolish this building and construct a new one and, in furtherance thereof, executed, a Permanent Alternate Accommodation Agreement dated 20th September 2013, allotting Flat No. 801, carpet area 700 sq. ft. on the 8th floor of the B-Wing of the new building. The agreement provided 24 months from the date of the issue....
“Section 38(2): Where the complaint relates to any goods, the District Commission shall,— 6. The Respondent No.2 also filed reply to the present appeal and refuted all the claims made by the Appellant and asserted that the impugned order dated 19.09.2023 is without any infirmity or error. 9. We deem also it appropriate to refer to Section 38(2)(a) r/w Section 49(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 which provides as under:— 7. We have perused the material available on record. 8. The first question for consideration before us is whether the District Commission erred by not tak....
“(1) The District Commission, the State Commission or the National Commission shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), a complaint may be entertained after the period specified in sub-section (1), if the complainant satisfies the District Commission, the State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, that he had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within such period: 16. The second issue to be adjudicated is whether t....
Consequently, the objection raised on behalf of the Opposite Party is answered in the negative. Whether the Present Complaint is barred by Limitation under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ?
These governing principles are to apply, “unless a different intention appears”. 47. In Neena Aneja & Anr. v. Jai Prakash Associates Ltd., (2022) 2 SCC 161, the Supreme Court has recently considered the effect of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act on the plea of transfer of pending Consumer Complaints on the repeal of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, and held as under: “82. Section 6 of the General Clauses Act provides governing principles with regard to the impact of the repeal of a central statute or regulation.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
