IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ANIRUDDHA ROY, J
VEELINE HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
KHETAWAT PROPERTIES LIMITED – Respondent
Civil Suit | CS-COM/825/2024 | IA | GA-COM/2/2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. defendant's need for timely submission. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. discussion on defendant's obligation. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 14 , 15) |
| 3. mandatory provisions under the cpc. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 4. court's decision on written statement. (Para 39 , 40) |
| 5. final ruling on application. (Para 41 , 42) |
1. The master summons and the supporting affidavit in IA NO.GA- COM/2/2025 has been taken out by the defendant with the following prayers :-
(a) Leave to file the written statement in the instant suit as the same is being filed within the statutory mandate of 120 days;
(b) Such further and/or other Order/(s) and/or Direction/(s) be given and/or made as to this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper;
2. Record shows that the master summons was taken out on August 19, 2025. For the purpose of adjudication of this application, the merits of the plaint case or the facts stated in the plaint are not relevant to be discussed, as such, those are not stated.
3. The writ of summons, as per the report of the office of the Deputy Sheriff dated November 26, 2025 was served upon the defendant on April 18, 2025. The mandated 30th day under the amended provision of Rule 1 to Order VIII of Code of Civil Procedure (for short CPC) from the date of service of writ of summons had expired on or before May 17, 2025
4. The mandated 120th day had expired on or about August 17, 2025 The matter was mentioned before the Coordinate Bench on behalf of the defendant on August 06, 2025, when ‘leave was granted to submit the written statement in the department in course of this day, subject to acceptance by this Court’. The endorsement on the fiat of the original written statement shows as such.
5. In the conspectus of the above facts, the defendant has taken out the master summons praying for extension of time to file written statement.
6. Pursuant to the direction of the Court the parties to the instant application have filed their respective written notes.
Submissions :
7. At the outset, the crux of the submissions made by Mr. Pranit Bag learned Advocate appearing for the defendant is narrated. He submits that the day when leave has been granted by the jurisdictional court to submit the written statement in the department in course of the day and the written statement has been submitted accordingly, it is sufficient within the meaning and expression of amended Rule 1 to Order VIII of CPC for filing the written statement and no formal application is required to be filed or to be on board.
8. Referring to the pre-amended provisions of Rule 1 to Order VIII of CPC and comparing the same with the amended provisions in view of the promulgation of the Commercial Court Act, 2025 (for short CC Act), he submits that in a non-commercial suit, the defendant shall, within 30 days from the date of service of summons on him present written statement of his defense. It is also provided that where the defendant fails to file the written statement within the said period of 30 days, he shall be allowed to file the same on such other day, as may be specified by the Court, for reasons to be recorded in writing, but which shall not be later than 90 days from the date of service of summons. Whereas the amended provisions applicable for commercial suit specifically provides that where the defendant fails to file the written statement within the period of 30 days, he shall be allowed to file written statement on such other day, as may be specified by the Court, for reasons to be recorded in writing and on payment of such costs as the Court deems fit, but which shall not be later than 120 days from the date of service of summons and on expiry of 120 days from the date of service of summons, the defendant shall forfeit the right to file the written statement and the Court shall not allow the written statement to be taken on record.
9. Mr. Pranit Bag, learned Advocate then refers to the Calcutta High Court amendment vide a notification no.9681-G dated Decem
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.