2009 INSC 0094
                                    SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                                             Belgique Fashions

                                                      Vs.

                                           Indian Overseas Bank

                                           C.A.No.1111 of 2007

                                  (B.N. Agrawal and G.S. Singhvi JJ.)

                                                  19.01.2009

                                                   ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

1. By the impugned order, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission [for
short, "the National Commission"] summarily dismissed the complaint filed by the appellant
on the ground that the same was barred by limitation.

2. Undisputedly, the National Commission dismissed the complaint without even issuing
notice to the respondent. Upon a perusal of a complaint, it cannot be said that the complaint
was barred by the limitation, per se. Therefore, the National Commission was not justified in
summarily dismissing the complaint on that ground and that too without taking note of the
fact that the appellant had also filed a petition for condonation of delay. This being the
position, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

3. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted
to the National Commission. Now, the National Commission shall first issue notice to the
respondent in the matter of limitation and pass appropriate order after giving opportunity of
hearing the parties on the question of limitation. If that question is decided in favour of the
appellant, then the National Commission shall decide the matter on merit.

1  SpotLaw