The court clarified that the extension of limitation due to the pandemic did not apply to the discretionary period for filing the written statement, and the defendants forfeited their right to file the written statement after the 120-day period.

JUDGMENT

Bharati Dangre, J. - Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent of parties.

2. The plaintiff, Pyrotek India Private Limited, instituted a Commercial Suit No.01 of 2020, seeking an injunction and restraint order against the defendants from using, divulging, distributing, publishing, revealing or dealing with the proprietary information and trade secrets of the plaintiff and a declaration that the defendants are not entitled to use the information and trade secrets of the plaintiff. In the said suit, the present petitioners are impleaded as defendant Nos. 1 and

3. The defendants received summons on 10/01/2020 and it was imperative for them to fle the written statement within 30 days. On 14/01/2020, by putting their appearance, they sought time to fle the written statement and they were granted time to do so on or before 11/02/2020. The time to fle the written statement was ettended, on an application fled by the defendants, till 11/03/2020. Since some documents were not available to the defendants, more time was sought for fling the written statement and the application was allowed, thereby the time to fle the written statement was ettended upto 24/03/2020.

4. The contention of the defendants is, in the month of March, on the outbreak of the Covid pandemic, the Courts restricted its timing and specifcally the Courts in Pune functioned for limited hours and from 25/03/2020, the lockdown was declared in the entire country and all the Courts practically shut and continued to function only for ettremely urgent matters. In the wake of this, it was not possible for the defendants to fle the written statement and though the period of 120 days etpired on 09/05/2020, the written statement could not be brought on record. On 02/07/2020, an application vide Eth.97 came to be fled, seeking permission to bring the written statement on record, which was opposed by the plaintiff on the ground of delay. The learned District Judge (Commercial Division), Pune, on hearing the rival parties, rejected the application on 28/01/2021 and ordered that the matter shall proceed without written statement of defendant Nos.1 and 6.

5. Heard learned counsel Mr.Shailendra Kanetkar for the petitioners and learned counsel Mr.abhishek Khare for the respondents.

The facts being not in dispute, I will deal with the core issue which arise for consideration in the present writ petition; whether the period of limitation for fling of written statement, as contemplated under Order 8 Rule 1 of the CPC got automatically ettended, since it is etpired during the period of lockdown and to be precise on 09/05/2020.

The submission of the learned counsel Mr.Kanetkar, by referring to the chronology of events is, in the wake of the pandemic the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Suo Motu Writ Petition No.3 of 2020, has ettended the limitation in all proceedings irrespective of limitation prescribed under the general law or special laws w.e.f. 15/03/2020 till further orders. The said order came to be passed by the apet Court in this country, to ameliorate the situation faced by the litigants and the advocates and the order dated 23/03/2020 in Cognizance for Ettension of Limitation, In re(2020) 19 SCC 10 , recorded the following binding directions.

'1. This Court has taken suo motu cognizance of the situation arising out of the challenge faced by the country on account of COVID-19 Virus and resultant diffculties that may be faced by litigants across the country in fling their petitions/applications/suits/appeals/all other proceedings within the period of limitation prescribed under the general law of limitation or under special laws (both Central and/or State).

2. To obviate such diffculties and to ensure that lawyers/litigants do not have to come physically to fle such proceedings in respective courts/tribunals across the country including this Court, it is hereby ordered that a period of limitation in all such proceedings, irrespective of the limitation prescribed under the gen