Conservation of Foreign Exchange & Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, had asked for certain copies of the documents from Union of India. Copies of the documents were supplied, but the same were not legible. It was observed that the safeguards provided by the Constitution had not been followed which eventually resulted in quashing of detention order. The said proposition is on all fours when one considers a case of detention which takes away someone‟s liberty. In Nahar Enterprises vs Hyderabad Allwyn Ltd. and Another (supra), there was no service of copy of plaint at all and, therefore, it was observed that the defendant was in no position to file any written statement. Relying on Rajesh Kathpal vs Shubh Steel (supra) , it has been contended that service of summons in a suit, in order to constitute a starting point for the time available for filing of a written statement, has to be meaningful service. In other words, the time for filing written statement would commence from the date when the suit along with the documents is provided to the defendant. In that case, the defendant contended that it had not received a complete set of the plaint with its annexures and the concerned plaintiff undertook to provide a copy of the plaint along with the annexures during the course of the day and, therefore, the defendant was granted 30 days' time from the day when a complete copy of the plaint with annexures was provided by the petitioner, to file written statement. It was in the above backdrop that written statement was taken on record. Here, as already noticed, there was complete inaction and indolence by OPs and their approaching learned Commission, even before the next date, would not earn them any reprieve, particularly, when the timeline is rigid and fixed. 42. As per section 38 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the Commission shall refer a copy of such complaint to the opposite party directing him to
