Case Note & Summary
The appellant, M/s Acme Cleantech Solutions Private Limited, filed a consumer complaint before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) on 28 September 2019, alleging that the first respondent, United India Insurance Company Limited, had failed to settle an insurance claim arising from two storms that damaged the appellant's solar power plants. The complaint sought settlement of the claim for material damage of INR 13,91,78,987.75 and business interruption of INR 6,00,00,000, along with interest, compensation, and litigation costs. On 17 October 2019, the NCDRC admitted the complaint and issued notice to the opposite party under Section 13(2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, granting 30 days to file a written statement. Notice was served on the first respondent on 5 November 2019, but no written statement was filed within the prescribed period. On 6 March 2020, the first respondent filed IA 3463 of 2020 seeking dismissal of the complaint as premature, claiming that the verification process was ongoing. On the same day, the insurer issued a letter repudiating the claim. The appellant filed IA 1346 of 2021 seeking production of the final survey report. The NCDRC, by order dated 11 March 2021, disposed of both applications, directing the appellant to file an amended complaint and granting the first respondent an opportunity to file a written statement to the amended complaint. The appellant challenged this order before the Supreme Court, arguing that the NCDRC's direction to amend the complaint and permit the insurer to file a written statement was contrary to Section 13(2) read with Section 22 of the Act, and deprived the appellant of the benefit of the Constitution Bench judgment in New India Assurance Company Limited v. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Private Limited, which held the period for filing a written statement to be mandatory. The Supreme Court held that the complainant is dominus litis and cannot be compelled to amend the complaint. The NCDRC's order was set aside to the extent it decided IA 3463 of 2020. The Court clarified that the appellant may pursue the complaint as it stands, amend it, or withdraw it with liberty to file a fresh complaint challenging the repudiation. The Court did not express any opinion on the effect of the repudiation or the right to file a written statement, leaving all contentions open.
Headnote
A) Consumer Law - Insurance Claim - Amendment of Complaint - Dominus Litis - The complainant is dominus litis and cannot be compelled to amend the complaint. The NCDRC erred in directing the appellant to amend the complaint and allowing the respondent to file a written statement to the amended complaint, as this would deprive the appellant of the benefit of the Constitution Bench judgment in New India Assurance Company Limited v. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Private Limited regarding the mandatory period for filing written statements. (Paras 9-12) B) Consumer Law - Written Statement - Mandatory Period - Section 13(1), Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - The period of 30 days (extendable by 15 days) for filing a written statement under Section 13(1) is mandatory, as held in Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Private Limited, with prospective effect. The insurer failed to file a written statement within this period. (Paras 3-6, 9) C) Consumer Law - Repudiation of Claim - Effect on Pending Complaint - The repudiation of the insurance claim on 6 March 2020 does not automatically render the complaint infructuous; the complainant may pursue the complaint as it stands, amend it, or withdraw it with liberty to file a fresh complaint challenging the repudiation. (Paras 9-11, 13)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) could compel the appellant-complainant to amend its consumer complaint and permit the respondent-insurer to file a written statement to the amended complaint, despite the insurer's failure to file a written statement within the mandatory period under Section 13(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court set aside the impugned order of the NCDRC dated 11 March 2021 to the extent it decided IA 3463 of 2020. The Court held that the appellant cannot be compelled to amend the complaint. The appellant may pursue the complaint as it stands, amend it, or withdraw it with liberty to file a fresh complaint challenging the repudiation. All rights and contentions of the parties are kept open. The appeals were disposed of.
Law Points
- Consumer Protection Act
- 1986
- Section 13(1)
- Section 13(2)
- Section 22
- Dominus Litis
- Amendment of pleadings
- Mandatory period for written statement
- Prospective effect of judgment
