SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(Del) 790

High Court Of Delhi
TEXSTYLES - Appellant
Versus
KIRAN OVERSEAS EXPORT LIMITED - Respondent
I.A. 3246 of 2003
Decided On : 09/21/2004

Advocates Appeared:
Bhuvan Gugnani, Guglani, Rajinder Wali

Strict compliance with the statutory period for filing the written statement and limitations on the court's discretion in granting extensions.

Headnote:

DISCRETION - WRITTEN STATEMENT - Order VIII Rule 1, Order VIII Rule 1A, Section 151, Section 122, Section 123 - The court discussed the amendments to the Code of Civil Procedure related to the filing of a written statement, the duty of the defendant to produce documents, and the court's discretion in granting extensions for filing the written statement. The court emphasized the strict compliance with the statutory period for filing the written statement and the limitations on the court's discretion.

Fact of the Case:

The defendants were directed to file their written statement within a specified period, but they failed to do so even after the amendment to the CPC. The court dismissed the application to condone the delay in filing the written statement due to lack of grounds and ordered the written statement to be taken off the record. The court also made a decision regarding the deletion of a party from the case.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the delay in filing the written statement was not justified and dismissed the application to condone the delay. The court also ordered the plaintiff to lead evidence by way of affidavits and directed the filing of pleadings and documents by the parties.

Issues: Delay in filing the written statement, application to condone the delay, deletion of a party from the case.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized strict compliance with the statutory period for filing the written statement and the limitations on the court's discretion in granting extensions. Lack of grounds to condone the delay led to the dismissal of the application.

Final Decision: The application to condone the delay in filing the written statement was dismissed, and the written statement was ordered to be taken off the record. The court also made a decision regarding the deletion of a party from the case and issued directions for the filing of pleadings and documents by the parties.

VIKRAMAJIT SEN, J.

( 1 ) THE QUESTION TO BE DECIDED IS WHETHER THE defendant HAS SUCCESSFULLY DISCLOSED A CASE FOR THE exercise IN ITS FAVOUR OF THE DISCRETION POSSESSED BY this COURT IN ITS FAVOUR UNDER ORDER VIII RULE 1 OF THE code OF CIVIL PROCEDURE AS AMENDED WITH EFFECT FROM 1. 7. 2002, AND IN PARTICULAR WHETHER ANY DISCRETION remains REPOSED WITH THE COURT AFTER THE EXPIRY OF ninety DAYS FROM THE DATE OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS ON THE defendant. THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS PRIOR AND POST THE amendment READ AS FOLLOWS: OLD PRESENT

R. 1. WRITTEN STATEMENT.-- (1) THE DEFENDANT SHALL, AT OR before THE FIRST HEARING OR WITHIN SUCH TIME AS THE court MAY PERMIT, PRESENT A WRITTEN STATEMENT OF HIS defence. (2) SAVE AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN RULE 8a, WHERE THE defendant RELIES ON ANY DOCUMENT (WHETHER OR NOT IN HIS possession OR POWER) IN SUPPORT OF HIS DEFENCE OR CLAIM for SET-OFF OR COUNTER-CLAIM, HE SHALL ENTER SUCH documents IN A LIST, AND SHALL,-- (A) IF A WRITTEN STATEMENT IS PRESENTED, ANNEX THE LIST to THE WRITTEN STATEMENT: PROVIDED THAT WHERE THE defendant, IN HIS WRITTEN STATEMENT, CLAIMS A SET-OFF OR makes A COUNTER-CLAIM BASED ON A DOCUMENT IN HIS possession OR POWER, HE SHALL PRODUCE IT IN COURT AT THE time OF PRESENTATION OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT AND SHALL at THE SAME TIME DELIVER THE DOCUMENT OR COPY THEREOF TO be FILED WITH THE WRITTEN STATEMENT; (B) IF A WRITTEN STATEMENT IS NOT PRESENTED, PRESENT the LIST TO THE COURT AT THE FIRST HEARING OF THE SUIT. (3) WHERE ANY SUCH DOCUMENT IS NOT IN THE POSSESSION OR power OF THE DEFENDANT, HE SHALL, WHEREVER POSSIBLE, state IN WHOSE POSSESSION OR POWER IT IS. (4) IF NO SUCH LIST IS SO ANNEXED OR PRESENTED, THE defendant SHALL BE ALLOWED SUCH FURTHER PERIOD FOR THE purpose AS THE COURT MAY THINK FIT. (5) A DOCUMENT WHICH OUGHT TO BE ENTERED IN THE LIST referred TO IN SUB-RULE (2), AND WHICH IS NOT SO, entered, SHALL NOT, WITHOUT THE LEAVE OF THE COURT, BE received IN EVIDENCE ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT AT THE hearing OF THE SUIT.

R. 1 WRITTEN STATEMENT.--THE DEFENDANT SHALL, WITHIN thirty DAYS FROM THE DATE OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS ON HIM, present A WRITTEN STATEMENT OF HIS DEFENCE: PROVIDED THAT WHERE THE DEFENDANT FAILS TO FILE the WRITTEN STATEMENT WITHIN THE SAID PERIOD OF THIRTY days, HE SHALL BE ALLOWED TO FILE THE SAME ON SUCH OTHER day, AS MAY BE SPECIFIED BY THE COURT, FOR REASONS TO BE recorded IN WRITING, BUT WHICH SHALL NOT BE LATER THAN ninety DAYS FROM THE DATE OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS.

R. 1a. DUTY OF DEFENDANT TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS UPON WHICH relief IS CLAIMED OR RELIED UPON BY HIM.-- (1) WHERE THE defendant BASIS HIS DEFENCE UPON A DOCUMENT OR RELIES upon ANY DOCUMENT IN HIS POSSESSION OR POWER, IN SUPPORT of HIS DEFENCE OR CLAIM FOR SET OFF OR COUNTER CLAIM, HE shall ENTER SUCH DOCUMENT IN A LIST, AND SHALL PRODUCE it IN COURT WHEN THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IS PRESENTED BY him AND SHALL, AT THE SAME TIME, DELIVER THE DOCUMENT AND a COPY THEREOF, TO BE FILED WITH THE WRITTEN STATEMENT. (2) WHERE ANY SUCH DOCUMENT IS NOT IN THE POSSESSION OR power OF THE DEFENDANT, HE SHALL, WHEREVER POSSIBLE, state IN WHOSE POSSESSION OR POWER IT IS. (3) A DOCUMENT WHICH OUGHT TO BE PRODUCED IN COURT BY the DEFENDANT UNDER THIS RULE, BUT, IS NOT SO PRODUCED shall NOT, WITHOUT THE LEAVE OF THE COURT, BE RECEIVED in EVIDENCE ON HIS BEHALF AT THE HEARING OF THE SUIT. (6) NOTHING IN SUB-RULE (5) SHALL APPLY TO DOCUMENTS produced FOR THE CROSS-EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF s witnesses OR IN ANSWER TO ANY CASE SET UP BY THE plaintiff SUBSEQUENT TO THE FILING OF THE PLAINT, OR handed OVER TO A WITNESS MERELY TO REFRESH HIS MEMORY. (7) WHERE A COURT GRANTS LEAVE UNDER SUB-RULE (5), IT shall RECORD ITS REASONS FOR SO DOING, AND NO SUCH LEAVE shall BE GRANTED UNLESS GOOD CAUSE IS SHOWN TO THE satisfaction OF THE COURT FOR THE NON-ENTRY OF THE document IN THE LIST REFERRED TO IN SUB-RULE (2 ). (4) NOTHING IN THIS RULE SHALL APPLY TO DOCUMENTS-- (A) PRODUCED FOR THE CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THE PLAINTIFF s witnesse

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top