Back
NAVIN CHAWLA
Sh. Vikrant Khanna – Appellant
Versus
Amita Lamba – Respondent
JUDGMENT
I.A. 18120/2022 and O.A 50/2022
1. By the present Chamber Appeal under Rule 5 of Chapter II of the Delhi High Court (Original) Side Rules, 2018 (in short, "the Rules"), the plaintiffs/appellants challenge the orders dated 15.09.2022 and 06.10.2022 passed by the learned Joint Registrar (Judicial) granting further time to the defendants/respondents to file their written statement.
2. The learned counsel for the plaintiffs/appellants, placing reliance on the judgments of this Court in Ram Sarup Lugani & Ors. v. Nirmal Lugani & Ors., 2020 SCC OnLine Del 1353, Shri Gautam Gambir v. Jai Ambay Traders & Ors., CS(OS) 149/2018: Harjyot Singh v. Manpreet Kaur, 2021 SCC OnLine Del 26: Sameer Chaudhuri v. Dr. Reyhan Chaudhuri, CS(OS) 283/2019 and Rohit Sharma v. A.M. Market Place Pvt Ltd. and Others, 2021 SCC OnLine Del 3092 submits that the time for filing the written statement by the defendants/respondents could not have been extended by the learned Joint Registrar (Judicial) beyond the period of 120 days of the service of the summons of the suit on the defendants/respondents.
3. He submits that this Court issued summons in the suit to the defendants/respondents on 26.11.2021. Alo
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the time for filing a written statement should be reckoned from the date of the order disposing of the application under Order VII Rule 11 of ....
The court affirmed that procedural rules regarding the filing of written statements can be interpreted flexibly to ensure justice, allowing extensions in exceptional circumstances.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between filing a written statement and bringing it on record, and the consequences of not filing an affidavit of admission/denial o....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the timeline for filing the Written Statement cannot be extended beyond the prescribed 120 days as per the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Ru....
The filing of the written statement and bringing it on record are separate matters. Filing the written statement without the affidavit of admission/denial of documents is a defect that can be cured w....
Procedural delays in filing should not bar adjudication on merits when substantive filings are made within prescribed timelines, reaffirming fairness in litigation.
The court held that the provisions of Order VIII Rule 1 CPC are directory, allowing written statements to be filed beyond prescribed delays in exceptional circumstances, particularly to serve the int....
The inviolability of the hard stop period of 120 days for filing the written statement in non-commercial suits as prescribed in Rule 4 of Chapter VII of the DHC Rules.
In commercial suits, written statements within 120 days from valid summons service (with plaint copy) must be accepted; extensions lean towards condonation if justified; procedural timelines subservi....
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
