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 CPC, and the COVID-19 pandemic extended the limitation period for filing the written statement.

JUDGMENT

Prateek Jalan, J. (Oral)

O.A. 47/2020 (Original Appeal on behalf of the defendant No. 2 under Chapter II Rule 5 of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018 challenging the order dated 09.09.2020 passed by the learned Joint Registrar (Judicial) of this Court) & I.A. 10180/2020 (for condonation of delay)

1. The present appeal filed by the defendant No. 2 is directed against an order of the learned Joint Registrar dated 09.09.2020, by which defendant No.2's right to file a written statement was closed.

2. The facts, in so far as they are relevant for the purposes of the present appeal, are as follows:

a. The plaintiff, South Delhi Municipal Corporation, instituted the suit for recovery of Rs.15,73,95,405/-, alongwith pendente lite and future interest, on 25.02.2017.

b. Summons were served upon defendant No. 2, pursuant to which it first entered appearance on 25.05.2017 and submitted before the learned Joint Registrar that it did not receive a copy of the documents. The documents were supplied to it on the same date by learned counsel for the plaintiff. Defendant No.2 was also granted an opportunity to the file the written statement.

c. No written statement was filed within the period of 30 days, as granted by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ["CPC"] and the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018 ["Original Side Rules"], but the defendant No. 2 made an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC for rejection of the plaint [I.A. No. 7663/2017]. It appears from the record that the said application was first filed on 03.07.2017. Defendant No. 2 also sought a direction therein for exempting it from filing of the written statement until the final adjudication of the application. Notice in this application was issued on 14.07.2017.

d. By various further orders of the learned Joint Registrar, commencing with order dated 29.08.2017, the submission of learned counsel for the plaintiff was recorded that the opportunity to file the written statement by defendant No. 2 be closed. The submission of learned counsel for defendant No. 2 that the written statement has not been filed in view of the pendency of its application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC [I.A. 7663/2017] was also recorded. For this purpose, defendant No. 2 relied upon judgments of the Supreme Court in Saleem Bhai vs. State of Maharashtra, (2003) 1 SCC 557 and R.K. Roja vs. U.S. Rayudu, (2016) 14 SCC 275. Although the order dated 29.08.2017 records these submissions, neither the right of defendant No. 2 to file the written statement was closed nor were the aforesaid submissions accepted.

e. By a further order dated 15.12.2017, the aforesaid submissions were once again noted and defendant No. 2 was directed to file its written statement "in accordance with law".

f. By an order dated 20.03.2018, the learned Joint Registrar once again noted the aforesaid submission and directed that the matter be listed before the Court.

g. I.A. 7663/2017 was ultimately disposed of by order dated 28.01.2020 by the learned Joint Registrar by treating it as an application under Order I Rule 10 of the CPC. It was held that defendant No. 2 is not liable to be deleted from the array of parties. Having so held, the learned Joint Registrar passed the following directions in the suit:

"Written statement, documents, if any and affidavit for admission/denial of documents be filed by defendant No.2 in accordance with law.

Plaintiff shall file replication and affidavit for admission/denial of documents within two weeks thereafter.

List for completion of pleadings and marking of exhibits to the documents on 18.03.2020."

h. The aforesaid order was assailed by defendant No. 2 in O.A. 31/2020. The appeal was dismissed on 25.02.2020, without modification of the order of the learned Joint Registrar.

i. By the impugned order dated 09.09.2020, the learned Joint Registrar closed the opportunity for defendant No. 2 to file the written statement recording that it was served long back and had failed to f