Real Estate_NCDRC_ reasonable delay_offer of possession

 

the delay of one year and two months cannot be said to be unreasonable.  Vineet Kumar versus DLF Universal Ltd. I (2019) CPJ 444 (NC)

Suo motu order extending limitation period also applies to filing of written statement: Supreme Court

Case name: Prakash Corporates vs Dee Vee Projects Limited

[Civil Appeal No(s). 1318 of 2022 arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos. 13751 of 2021]

Coram: Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram Nath

*Suo motu order extending limitation period also applies to filing of written statement: Supreme Court*

Para 20.2. In other words, the orders passed by this Court on 23.03.2020, 06.05.2020, 10.07.2020, 27.04.2021 and 23.09.2021 in SMWP No. 3 of 2020 leave nothing to doubt that special and extraordinary measures were provided by this Court for advancing the cause of justice in the wake of challenges thrown by the pandemic; and their applicability cannot be denied in relation to the period prescribed for filing the written statement. *It would be unrealistic and illogical to assume that while this Court has provided for exclusion of period for institution of the suit and therefore, a suit otherwise filed beyond limitation (if the limitation had expired between 15.03.2020 to 02.10.2021) could still be filed within 90 days from 03.10.2021 but the period for filing written statement, if expired during that period, has to operate against the defendant.* 

Para 21. It is also noteworthy that even before the scope of the orders passed in SMWP No. 3 of 2020 came to be further elaborated and specified in the orders dated 08.03.2021 and 23.09.2021, this Court dealt with an akin scenario in the case of SS Group Pvt. Ltd. (supra), decided on 17.12.2020. In that case, in terms of Section 38(2)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, 30 days’ time provided for filing the written 41 statement expired on 12.08.2020 and the extendable period of 15 days also expired on 27.08.2020.  *Admittedly, the written statement was filed on 31.08.2020, which was beyond the permissible period of 45 days.*  The Constitution Bench of this Court has held in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hill Multipurpose Cold Storage (P) Ltd.: (2020) 5 SCC 757 that the Consumer Court has no power to extend the time for filing response to the complaint beyond 45 days.  *After taking note of the applicable provisions of law as also the mandate of Constitution Bench, this Court referred to the orders until then passed in SMWP No. 3 of 2020 and held that the limitation for filing written statement would be deemed to have been extended.*  This Court, inter alia, observed and held as follows: -

 “12: In the present matter, it is an admitted fact that the period of limitation of 30 days to file the written statement had expired on 12.08.2020 and the extended period of 15 days expired on 27.08.2020. This period expired when the order dated 23.03.2020 passed by this Court in SMW(C) No. 3 of 2020 was continuing. 

13: In view of the aforesaid, in our opinion, the limitation for filing the written statement in the present proceedings before the National Commission would be deemed to have been extended as it is clear from the order dated 23.03.2020 that the extended period of limitation was applicable to all petitions/applications/suits/appeals and all other proceedings. As such, the delay of four days in filing the written statements in the pending proceedings before the National Commission deserves to be allowed, and is accordingly allowed.”

https://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/judgments/announcement.php?WID=14698

1. The order dated 23.03.2020 is restored and in continuation of the subsequent orders dated 08.03.2021, 27.04.2021 and 23.09.2021, it is directed that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purposes of limitation as may be prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi­ judicial proceedings

2. Consequently, the balance period of limitation remaining as on 03.10.2021, if any, shall become available with effect from 01.03.2022.

3. *In cases where the limitation would have expired during the period between 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022,* notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation remaining, *all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days* from 01.03.2022. In the event the actual balance period of limitation remaining, with effect from 01.03.2022 is greater than 90 days, that longer period shall apply.

4. It is further clarified that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under Sections 23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings".

https://livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-restores-limitation-extension-period-from-15032020-till-28022022-excluded-from-limitation-189193