##PAGE1##

$~30

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CM(M) 2493/2025

ANKITA PRIYADARSHINI .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Aayush Agarwala, Advocate

(through videoconferencing) and Ms.

Mukti Heliwal, Advocate

versus

ARPAN SAXENA .....Respondent

Through: None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

O R D E R

% 23.12.2025

CM APPL. 81557/2025 (exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

CM(M) 2493/2025 & CM APPL. 81556/2025 (stay)

2. Petitioner/defendant has assailed orders dated 26.04.2025 and

29.11.2025 of the learned trial court. By way of order dated 26.04.2025, the

right to file written statement was closed because during the prescribed

period, the petitioner/defendant failed to file the written statement. By way

of order dated 29.11.2025, application seeking review of order dated

26.04.2025 was dismissed.

3. It appears that the application for review was accompanied with the

written statement and an application under Section 5 Limitation Act seeking

condonation of delay in filing the written statement. The learned trial court

dismissed the review application but despite covering the grounds

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 22:55:59

mentioned in the application under Section 5 Limitation Act, did not

specifically dispose of that application.

4. Broadly speaking, summons were allegedly served on the

petitioner/defendant on 13.01.2025 and paperbook was supplied to her on

07.03.2025. Learned counsel for petitioner/defendant has shown me order

dated 07.03.2025 of the trial court. That being so, the statutory period during

which the written statement could be filed as a matter of right expired on

06.04.2025 and the extendable period of 90 days expired on 06.06.2025,

though beyond that also the written statement could be taken on record in

exceptional circumstances. The written statement in the present case was

filed on 04.06.2025, i.e. within 90 days of service of paperbook.

5. Against the above backdrop, learned counsel for petitioner/defendant

contends that petitioner was able to set up sufficient reasons explaining the

delay in filing the written statement. The reasons set up were that mother of

the petitioner/defendant had suffered brain haemorrhage and the doctor

concerned had advised 24 hours attendance. The learned trial court took a

view that in the other proceedings between the same parties, the

petitioner/defendant was participating in the proceedings, so there was no

reason for delay in filing the written statement. In this regard, learned

counsel for petitioner/defendant contends that attending the other

proceedings through videoconferencing or physically is not as difficult as

sitting with the counsel to prepare written statement in the circumstances in

which the petitioner/defendant is attending to her bedridden mother.

6. Considering the above circumstances, the proceedings before the trial

court till next date are stayed.

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 22:55:59

7. Subject to petitioner taking steps within one week, notice through all

modes be issued to the respondent, returnable on 18.03.2026 before

Registrar.

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J

DECEMBER 23, 2025

‘rs’

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 22:55:59