Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
GIRISH KATHPALIA
Vikrant Vats – Appellant
Versus
Ajay Gahlot – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
GIRISH KATHPALIA, J.
1. The appellant has assailed judgment and decree dated 27.11.2024, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, South West, Dwarka, Delhi under Order XXXVII CPC on account of failure on the part of the appellant to file application for leave to defend within stipulated period. Learned counsel for appellant has taken me through the relevant record already filed with the appeal. Having heard learned counsel for appellant, I find no ground to issue notice of this appeal.
2. Briefly stated, the circumstances leading to this appeal are that the present respondent filed a suit under Order XXXVII CPC against the appellant for recovery of Rs. 87,00,000/- on the basis of two cheques which had got dishonoured on being presented. The summons for judgment were served on the appellant on 06.07.2024 and application for leave to defend was filed on 18.11.2024. The application for leave to defend having not been filed within prescribed period, the application was dismissed and the suit was decreed. Hence the present appeal.
3. Learned counsel for appellant has tried to address submissions on merits of the case. But admittedly, there is no explanation for the appell
Failure to file an application for leave to defend within the prescribed period results in dismissal of the appeal and upholding of the decree.
The court upheld that failure to comply with the deposit requirement negated the appellant's claims of fraud regarding the cheques, justifying the trial court's decree in favor of the respondent.
The court emphasized that minor procedural delays can be condoned when reasonable explanations are provided, reinforcing the principle of procedural fairness in the legal process.
The court upheld that a minor delay in filing a leave to defend application can be condoned if sufficient cause is demonstrated, affirming the discretionary nature of procedural rules in civil litiga....
A defendant's application for leave to defend must be considered on its merits and cannot be dismissed for non-prosecution.
Delay in filing for leave to defend in summary proceedings is not condoned without sufficient cause, particularly where negligence is evident.
Point of Law : Order of the learned Trial Judge rejecting the application for leave to defend on merits, ought to be substituted by an order rejecting that application as premature.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that leave to defend should not be refused unless the defendant's contentions are frivolous and do not raise any triable issue. The court emphasize....
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
