High Court of Delhi

Dell International Services Private Limited vs. Adeel Feroze and Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:DHC:4954)

MANU/DE/4392/2024

02.07.2024

Consumer

Whatsapp conversations cannot be read as evidence without there being a proper certificate as mandated under the Evidence Act

Petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the Order passed by the Delhi State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (State Commission) in Revision Petition by which the State Commission has upheld the Order passed by the Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (District Commission). Vide Order the District Commission has refused to take on record the written statement filed by the Petitioner herein on the ground that the same was filed beyond the period of limitation.

The District Commission analysed the weight of the documents sent along with the summons and the postal charges and came to the conclusion that complete set of documents was sent along with the summons and the same was received by the Petitioner on 23rd December, 2022. The District Commission, therefore, held that the application of the Petitioner herein for condonation of delay of seven days in filing the Written Statement is not bona fide.

The screen shot of whatsapp conversations cannot be taken into account by this Court while dealing with a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, more so, when there is nothing to show that the conversations were produced before the State Commission as this Court does not find any reference of the same in the present Writ Petition. Further, there is no discussion of the same in the Order of the State Commission. In any event, the Whatsapp conversations cannot be read as evidence without there being a proper certificate as mandated under the Evidence Act, 1872.

The State Commission, in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction, has come to the conclusion that no valid reason has been given by the Petitioner herein for condonation of delay in filing the written statement.

A reading of the abovementioned Section would show that the period of filing a written statement after receiving the copy of the complaint is 30 days and the same can be extended up to fifteen days if the District Commission deems it fit to do so. In the present case, the summons was issued on 17th December, 2022 and it was received by the Petitioner herein on 23rd December, 2022 and the period of 30 days got over on 21st January, 2023. The Petitioner filed its Written Statement only on 31st January, 2023 and raised a plea that it has not received a complete set of documents along with the summons when, in fact, a complete set of documents has been served to the Petitioner with the summons as is evident from the weight of the documents sent along with the summons and the postal charges.

Present Court does not find any reason to hold that the reason given by the District Commission in refusing to condone the delay in filing the written submission is erroneous. Petition dismissed.

Tags : Delay Condonation Discretion

Share :