Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
Managing Committee Delhi University Co-operative Store Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Asian Enterprises – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the initial trial procedures (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. consent to hear pending application (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's directive to reconsider application (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. conclusion and order of costs (Para 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT
Tushar Rao Gedela, J. (ORAL)
1. With the consent of parties, the present petition is taken up for final disposal.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner impugns the order dated 15.09.2022, whereby the right to file the written statement on behalf of defendant Nos. 1 to 3, before the learned Trial Court, was forfeited.
3. Vide the same order the learned Trial Court had listed the matter further for plaintiff's evidence and simultaneously, permitted the defendants to cross examine the witnesses on very limited rights.
4. Mr. Randhir Kumar, learned counsel appears for the respondents submits that subsequent to the impugned order, the petitioner herein filed an application seeking extension of time to take the written statement on record, which is still pending adjudication and, no orders have been passed thereon.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that he would have no objection, if the pending applicati
The court emphasized the importance of allowing parties to file their written statements to uphold justice, particularly when procedural rights have been unjustly forfeited.
The right to file a written statement is forfeited after 120 days unless justifiable grounds for extension are shown, requiring substantive reasoning recorded by the court.
The court emphasized that the extension of time to file the written statement must be justified and recorded in writing, and the defendant cannot claim an extension of time as a matter of course.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the time limit for filing a written statement under the Civil Procedure Code should be treated as directory, and the court should balance the ....
Timeliness in filing written statements is crucial; any delay beyond prescribed limits without an accompanying application for condonation is impermissible.
Point of Law : Delay in filing Written statement - Commercial Court dealing with a commercial suit had no discretion to condone delay and could not allow the written statement to be taken on record b....
Trial Courts should consider a lenient view for completion of pleadings, especially regarding the filing of written statements beyond the stipulated period, as reiterated by the Supreme Court in prev....
Point of Law : provisions of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 have to be strictly construed and if the provisions are given liberal interpretation, the object behind the enactment, of speedy disposal,....
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
