9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1765X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rchant [2002 (8) TMI 835 - SUPREME COURT] whether the Forum can grant time beyond 45 days to the opposite party for filing its version. After considering the aforestated section in the light of the object with which the Act has been enacted, a three-Judge Bench of this Court came to the conclusion that in no case period beyond 45 days can be granted to the opposite party for filing its version of the case - the judgment delivered in the case of Dr. J.J. Merchant holds the field and therefore, the District Forum can grant a further period of 15 days to the opposite party for filing his version or reply and not beyond that. Reference disposed off. - Civil Appeal Nos. 10941-10942, 10943-10944 of 2013, 1774 of 2014, SLP (C) Nos. 2833 and 11257-11258 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 4-12-2015 - Anil R. Dave, Vikramajit Sen and Pinaki Chandra Ghose, JJ. For the Appellant : Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv., Vishnu Mehra, Sakshi Mittal, Advs. for Manjeet Chawla, Adv., K.R. Sasiprabhu, Vishnu Sharma, Somiran Sharma, Biju P. Raman, Sanjoy Kumar Ghosh, Rupali S. Ghosh, Advs. for Snehasish Mukherjee, Adv. For the Respondents : Uday Gupta, Hiren Dasan, Narayan Chandra Das, Chand Qureshi, Advs. for Sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve his version of the case within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the complaint. There is a further provision in Section 13(2)(a) that the District Forum may extend the period, not exceeding 15 days, to the opposite party for giving his version. The relevant Section of the Act reads as under: 13. Procedure on admission of complaint-(1) .... (2) The District Forum shall, if the complaint admitted by it Under Section 12 relates to goods in respect of which the procedure specified in Sub-section (1) cannot be followed, or if the complaint relates to any services,- (a) refer a copy of such 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 the District Forum; (b) .... Thus, upon plain reading of the aforestated Section, one can find that the opposite party is given 30 days' time for giving his version and the said period for filing or giving the version can be extended by the District Forum, but the extension should not exceed 15 days. Thus, an upper cap of 45 days has been imposed by the Act for filing version ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pearing for the complainant submitted that the view expressed by the three-Judge Bench of this Court in Dr. J.J. Merchant (supra) is absolutely just and proper and is on the subject, with which facts of the present case are concerned. The said case also deals with the provisions of Section 13(2)(a) of the Act, whereas case of Kailash (supra) pertains to an Election trial and under a different Act. 10. According to the learned Counsel appearing for the complainant, in the instant case, in fact, there is no conflict between the two judgments referred to hereinabove as the judgment delivered in Dr. J.J. Merchant (supra) was prior in time and was on the subject of the Act. Looking at the contents of the said judgment, it is clear that the said judgment also pertains to the provisions with regard to grant of time for filing version of the opposite party before the District Forum. Once a judgment has been delivered by a three-Judge Bench on the same subject and on the same section, according to the learned Counsel, there was no need to re-consider the same. 11. On the other hand, the learned Counsel appearing for the other side contended that as per the view expressed in the case o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be possible for the Respondent/other side to file its version even within 45 days and therefore, in the interest of justice, the view expressed in the case of Kailash (supra) should be accepted. 15. Upon hearing the concerned counsel and upon perusal of both the judgments referred to hereinabove, which pertain to extension of time for the purpose of filing written statement, we are of the opinion that the view expressed by the three-Judge Bench of this Court in Dr. J.J. Merchant (supra) should prevail. 16. In the case of Dr. J.J. Merchant (supra), which is on the same subject, this Court observed as under: 13. The National Commission or the State Commission is empowered to follow the said procedure. From the aforesaid section it is apparent that on receipt of the complaint, the opposite party is required to be given notice directing him to give his version of the case within a period of 30 days or such extended period not exceeding 15 days as may be granted by the District Forum or the Commission. For having speedy trial, this legislative mandate of not giving more than 45 days in submitting the written statement or the version of the case is required to be adhered to. If ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bench of a larger strength is binding on a subsequent Bench of lesser or equal strength. After considering a number of judgments, a five-Judge Bench of this Court, finally opined as under: 12. Having carefully considered the submissions made by the learned senior Counsel for the parties and having examined the law laid down by the Constitution Benches in the abovesaid decisions, we would like to sum up the legal position in the following terms: (1) The law laid down by this Court in a decision delivered by a Bench of larger strength is binding on any subsequent Bench of lesser or co-equal strength. (2) A Bench of lesser quorum cannot disagree or dissent from the view of the law taken by a Bench of larger quorum. In case of doubt all that the Bench of lesser quorum can do is to invite the attention of the Chief Justice and request for the matter being placed for hearing before a Bench of larger quorum than the Bench whose decision has come up for consideration. It will be open only for a Bench of coequal strength to express an opinion doubting the correctness of the view taken by the earlier Bench of coequal strength, whereupon the matter may be placed for hearing before a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
