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

DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATEEK JALAN
Sunil Kumar Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Vatsal Mittal – Respondent


Table of Content
1. nature of written statement delay and its implications. (Para 1 , 2)
2. circumstances justifying delay in filing. (Para 3 , 4)
3. impact of supreme court orders on limitation. (Para 5 , 6)
4. interpretation of orders in extraordinary circumstances. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
5. court's final ruling and directions. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)

JUDGMENT

Prateek Jalan, J. (Oral)

The proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video conferencing.

1. The petitioner, who is the defendant in CS (Comm) 276/2020 pending before the District Judge, Commercial Court-01, Shahdara, Karkardooma Court, Delhi, assails an order dated 10.01.2022 by which the Trial Court has taken his written statement off the record on the ground of delay.

2. The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.6,40,801/- alongwith pendente lite and future interest on 22.02.2020. Although there is some controversy with regard to the date of service of summons, the defendant's own case is that the summons were served on 23.03.2021. The written statement was, however, filed only on 26.08.2021, after lapse of the maximum period contemplated under Order VIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 19

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top