MA/3/2022
Neena Kashyap Vs. The New India Assurance
Dated: 18.07.2022
Present:
Counsel for the parties.
This order shall dispose of an application moved by the applicant/ complainant for striking of the defence of the Opposite Parties and for allowing the applicant/ complainant to conclude the evidence alleging that the Opposite Parties have appeared on 31.12.2021 in the instant complaint, but despite of taking of more than 7 opportunities, the Opposite Parties did not file the written reply and moreover, 45 days period has already been elapsed and prays for striking of the defence of the Opposite Parties.
On the other hand, ld.counsel for the Opposite Parties filed the reply to the application and submitted that the delay for filing the written reply on behalf of the Opposite Party was beyond the control of Opposite Party due to the situation arisen due to pandemic covid-19 and hence, the present application may please be dismissed.
Perused the application as well as reply filed by the Opposite Parties.
Hon’ble Supreme Court in complaint titled as New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storge decided on 4th March, 2020 hold that the District Forum has no power to extend the time for filing the response to the complaint beyond the period of 15 days in addition to 30 days as envisaged under section 38 (2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (previous section 13 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986) and the commencing point of limitation of 30 days of the Act would be from the date of receipt of notice accompanied with the complaint by the Opposite Party and not merely receipt of the notice of the complaint.
As we do not possess any power to give further time period after completion of 15 days in addition to 30 days as envisaged Section 38(2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (previous section 13 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986), so the right of filing written statement of the Opposite Parties is closed. The misc.application be attached with main complaint.
