#Section 38

The Commission ruled that internal administrative delays and summer vacations do not constitute sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing a written statement. The 15-day extension under Section 38(2)(a) is discretionary, requiring specific, substantiated justification, not a routine entitlement. This raises the bar for opposite parties seeking late filing in consumer disputes.

The West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission affirmed that a written version under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 must be submitted within the statutory 30-day period, with only a discretionary 15-day extension permissible. Non-compliance led to dismissal of Union Bank of India's revision petition, highlighting strict deadline adherence for all parties.

The Supreme Court ruled that the statutory absolute limit on police-custody duration under the BNSS is invalid, allowing police to question accused persons outside prison premises. However, the right of an accused to have an advocate present is confined to narrowly defined situations, reshaping investigative practice nationwide.

The Karnataka High Court ruled that plaintiffs who are not executants of a sale deed are not liable to pay ad valorem court fees under Section 38 of the Karnataka Court Fees Act for seeking a declaration of nullity. This decision reinforces the distinction between cancellation and declaration suits, impacting litigants in property disputes.