Shalinder Singh son of Ajit Singh, R/o House No.355, Ram Basti, Street 8 A, Sangrur, Punjab. .....Respondent/Complainant Revision Petition under Section 47 (1)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 19.12.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana in C.C. No.320 of 2022. Quorum: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary, President Ms. Simarjot Kaur, Member Mr. Vishav Kant Garg, Member Present: For the Petitioners : Sh. Mrigank Sharma, Advocate 2 Revision Petition No.95 of 2024 1) Whether Reporters of the Newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes/No 2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes/No 3) Whether judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY, PRESIDENT: The Petitioners/OPs i.e. Ludhiana Improvement Trust and another, through their Authorized Signatory being aggrieved by the order dated 19.12.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana (in short the "District Commission"), whereby the request for extension of time in filing written statement had been declined, have filed the present Revision Petition. 2. There is delay of 607 days in filing the Revision Petition. The Applicants have filed M.A. No.1379 of 2024 for condonation of delay of 607 days in filing of the Revision Petition. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case which are necessary for disposal of the present Revision Petition are that the Complainant filed Complaint before the District Commission wherein notices were issued to the OPs for 02.11.2022. The Complaint came up for hearing on 02.11.2022. Counsel representing OPs had appeared and filed power of attorney on their behalf. The order was passed by issuing directions to the OPs to file written statement alongwith affidavit as well as documents within the prescribed period. Thereafter, the Complaint was adjourned to 19.12.2022 for further proceedings. The 3 Revision Petition No.95 of 2024 Complaint came up for hearing on 19.12.2022 and the following order was passed : "Written statement/version on behalf of OPs not filed. Counsel for OPs seek adjournment for extension of time for filing the same beyond the maximum period of 45 days. Heard. On the last date of hearing, OPs were directed to file the written statement/version of the case but OPs have failed to take any action to represent their case within the statutory period. As such, right to file the written statement/version of OPs stands extinguished in view of Section 38 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in New India Assurance Company Limited versus Hilly Multipurpose Old Storage (P) Ltd.(2012)5 (SC)757. Hence, the request for extension of time for filing written statement/ version on behalf of OPs beyond the mandatory period is hereby declined. Consequently, we directed that Complaint shall be proceeded further to settle the consumer dispute exparte on the basis of evidence to be brought by the Complainant only on before on before positively by 07.03.2023." It was mentioned in the said order that the OPs had failed to file reply within the statutory period and their right to file written version was extinguished in view of provisions of Section 38 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and in view of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of case Hilly Multipurpose Old Stor