The Supreme Court has ruled that the 30-day deadline for filing a written statement under the Consumer Protection Act begins only when the opposing party receives both the notice and a copy of the complaint, not just the notice alone.

A bench comprising Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Rajesh Bindal emphasized that it would be unjust to prevent a party from filing a written statement based on mere assumptions.

The ruling came in response to a civil appeal filed by Ricardo Constructions Pvt Ltd, challenging a National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) order from July 19, 2024. The NCDRC had denied Ricardo Constructions the right to file a written statement in response to a complaint by Ravi Kuckian and 30 others, citing the lapse of time. However, the Supreme Court noted that the Commission had not recorded whether the copy of the complaint was served to the appellant along with the notice, which is a key requirement.

Ricardo Constructions' counsel argued that the complaint copy was never provided, and without it, the company was unable to file a written statement. Citing the 2020 Constitution Bench judgment in New India Assurance Company Limited vs Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Private Limited, the appellant's counsel maintained that the deadline begins only upon the receipt of both the notice and the complaint, a position the Supreme Court upheld.

The respondent, however, contended that the appellant was attempting to delay the proceedings and should have requested the complaint copy if it was not received. The NCDRC had foreclosed Ricardo Constructions' right to file a written statement after more than 45 days passed from the notice's receipt.

Nevertheless, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the NCDRC's order and granting Ricardo Constructions the opportunity to file its written statement. The court also ensured that the complainants would have ample time to respond before the next scheduled hearing on January 9, 2025.

"The order does not record that copy of the complaint has been supplied by the counsel for the complainants to the counsel for the opposite party No.1/the appellant herein. Any such observation by the Commission in its order would have clinched the issue. It is not a case where along with the notice, copy of the complaint was accompanied," the bench said.

The Supreme Court allowed the appellant to submit the written statement by October 14, 2024, on the condition of paying Rs 1,00,000 each to respondent Nos. 1 to 31/complainants as costs.