Consumer Cases: SC Says Notice Without Complaint Copy Does Not Trigger Limitation for Written Statement

The Supreme Court has held that the limitation period for filing a written statement in a consumer case does not begin unless the notice served on the opposite party is accompanied by a copy of the consumer complaint.

A Bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Sanjeev Sachdeva made the observation while allowing an appeal filed by HDFC Bank Ltd, noting that the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) had failed to verify whether a notice served on the Bank in 2019 was accompanied by a copy of the consumer complaint.

Notice without consumer complaint does not trigger limitation

Court relied on its earlier judgment in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. (2020), which had categorically held that service of notice on the opposite party would not be proper and adequate unless it was accompanied by a copy of the consumer complaint.

The appeal arose out of an order passed by the NCDRC on September 13, 2023, in a consumer case filed in 2014 by Umesh Ambika Prasad Mishra.

By the said order, the NCDRC rejected the written statement filed by HDFC Bank on the ground that it was barred by limitation in terms of the law laid down in New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Aggrieved by the order, the Bank approached the Supreme Court. On November 10, 2023, the court stayed further proceedings in the consumer case.

Why did the Supreme Court set aside the NCDRC order?

The Supreme Court found that the NCDRC had failed to examine whether the notice served on the Bank in October 2019 was accompanied by a copy of the consumer complaint.

The Bench noted that the notice was stated to have been served on the Bank on October 29, 2019. However, the NCDRC had not inspected the record to verify whether a copy of the consumer complaint was actually enclosed with the notice.

"In the case on hand, we find that the NCDRC failed to examine this aspect by inspecting the record to verify whether the notice sent in October, 2019, which is stated to have been served upon the appellant-Bank on 29.10.2019, was actually accompanied by a copy of the consumer case," the Bench said.

Court held that unless this fact was established beyond doubt, the NCDRC ought not to have rejected the Bank's written statement as time-barred.

The Bench also noted that the Bank had filed its written statement within the prescribed period after receiving a fresh notice in 2021, which was accompanied by a copy of the consumer complaint.

It accordingly set aside the NCDRC's order and directed the Commission to take the written statement filed by HDFC Bank on record and decide the consumer case on its merits and in accordance with law.

Case Title: HDFC Bank Ltd Vs Umesh Ambika Prasad Mishra

Bench: Justices Sanjay Kumar and Umesh Ambika Prasad Mishra

Date of Judgment: August 4, 2026