Procedural delays in filing should not bar adjudication on merits when substantive filings are made within prescribed timelines, reaffirming fairness in litigation.

JUDGMENT

V. Kameswar Rao, J. (ORAL)

O.A. 30/2022

1. The present appeal has been filed by the M/s. New India Assurance Company Limited/Defendant/Appellant herein, against the order dated July 12, 2022, passed by the Joint Registrar in I.A. No. 10473/2022 and I.A No. 10472/2022 in C.S.(COMM) No. 713/2021) with the following prayer;-

"It is, therefore respectfully prayed that the present petition may be kindly be allowed and order of Ms Vandana Jain, Joint Registrar (Judicial) Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in case no. C.S. (Comm.) No. 713/2021 titled `Dalip Singh Adhikari Vs. M/s The New India Assurance Co Ltd.' passed on 12.07.2022 may kindly be set aside with costs. Any other further order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case may be passed."

2. It is the case of the appellant/defendant that, on December 24, 2021, an advance copy of the suit was served on the appellant/defendant and Shri J.P.N.Shahi, Advocate, appeared on behalf of appellant company. The paper book was supplied to the counsel for the appellant/defendant. The office of the appellant Company situated at Delhi appointed another Advocate to defend the case.

3. It is the case of the appellant/defendant that the counsel suddenly, in middle of March 2022, returned the brief for unknown reasons. In the last week of March 2022, the appellant company appointed the present counsel; who took some time to draft the written statement.

4. The counsel for the appellant stated that the counsel had filed the written statement along with the affidavit of admission/denial of documents of the plaintiff, documents on its behalf and Vakalatnama. The same were acknowledged by the Registry by assigning separate diary numbers.

5. On April 01, 2022, the counsel for the petitioner received an e-mail from the registry raising objections regarding the fresh notice of motion and the question of maintainability under Order VIII Rule I A, as the same has been omitted as per Commercial Court Act. He stated that no objection was raised by the registry with regard to Written Statement and affidavit of admission/denial of documents.

6. It appears the e-mail sent by the registry had also put objections that, all the pages of the documents filed which are copies of original, need to be marked with TC (True Copy) and also Page No. 65 of the documents is not legible. The e-mail from the registry, went unnoticed; till July 05, 2022, when he logged into his mail, to know that there is a mail from the registry with respect to the objections/defects in the filing, dated March 30, 2022.

7. It is stated that the objections were removed and applications under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, being I.A.No. 10472/2022 and I.A. No.10473/2022, were re-filed on July 7, 2022. These applications were for seeking enlargement of time in filing the written statement (I.A. No.10472/2022) and condonation of delay of 60 days in re-filing the applications and list of documents (IA NO. 10473/2022).

8. It is the case of the appellant herein, that no reply was filed by the respondent/plaintiff. The learned Joint Registrar, however, vide order dated July 12, 2022, dismissed both the applications being I.A. No 10472/2022 and I.A. No 10473/2022 and thereby directing the Registry to take off the Written Statement/affidavit and documents from the record. The Joint Registrar in the order dated July 12, 2022, observed as under ;-

"Arguments on the IA heard. Record perused.

The perusal of record shows that the Learned counsel for defendant had appeared on 24.12.2021 without issuance