Back
NAVIN CHAWLA
Chand Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Om Prakash Gulati – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Navin Chawla, J. - This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 04.03.2020 passed by the learned Additional District Judge-03, Rohini Courts, North District, in Suit filed by the respondent, being CS No. 433 of 2017, titled Om Prakash Gulati v. Pramod Chandra & Ors., dismissing the application of the petitioner, who is defendant no.2 in the Suit, seeking recall of the order dated 02.02.2018 by which the right of the petitioner to file written statement on record was closed.
2. The Impugned Order itself records that the petitioner was served with the summons of the Suit by way of affixation on 05.09.2017 and had appeared on 12.10.2017. On the said date, a request was made by the petitioner for supply of the complete set of documents. The Suit thereafter was adjourned to 18.01.2018, on which date, the petitioner filed an application under Order VIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'). The same was allowed by the learned Trial Court, subject to payment of Rs.1,000/- and with a direction that a final opportunity is granted to the petitioner for filing of written statement by the next date of hearing,
Deliberate delay in adjudication can lead to the closure of the right to file a written statement.
The court affirmed the closure of a petitioner's right to file a written statement due to repeated non-compliance and non-appearance, indicating a lack of seriousness in the proceedings.
The court ruled that a party's right to file a written statement should not be denied due to delay, provided costs are imposed, emphasizing the importance of a fair trial.
Failure to file the written statement and subsequent attempts to seek permission to file the same without justification may lead to dismissal of the petition and the impugned orders.
The court upheld the dismissal of the writ petition due to the petitioner's failure to file written statements within the stipulated time, emphasizing adherence to procedural timelines.
The court emphasized the importance of complying with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and the Commercial Courts Act 2015, regarding the filing of written statements and the exten....
Exceptional circumstances must be made out to permit the filing of a written statement beyond the prescribed period.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that disputes should be resolved on merits rather than technicalities, and in deserving cases, delay in filing pleadings can be condoned subject....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the provisions of Order VIII Rule 1 CPC are procedural and not mandatory, and in non-commercial suits, the court has the power to condone the ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
