In Brief
The Supreme Court addressed whether a 67-day delay in filing a revision before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) should be condoned under the Consumer Protection Act, 1985. The NCDRC had refused to condone the delay. The Court held that the delay was not 'huge' and should have been condoned. The Court emphasised that the aim of limitation law in this context is to achieve substantial justice, not to strictly punish procedural non-compliance. The Court set aside the NCDRC's order, condoned the delay, and remitted the case to the NCDRC for decision on merits."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.