$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 41/2022 with I.A. 1377/2022, I.A. 6018/2024, I.A. 6019/2024 I.A. 6020/2024 and O.A. 54/2024 KAMALJIT KAUR AHUJA & ANR. .....Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Siddhant Nath, Mr. Bhavishya Makhija and Mr. Amaan Khan, Advs.

versus TANIA SUDAN .....Defendant Through: Mr. Aaditya Vijay Kumar and Mr. Naman Garg, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

O R D E R

% 04.12.2025 I.A. 6019/2024 (seeking exemption from filing certified/ original/ illegible copies of documents

1. Allowed, subject to the plaintiffs filing certified, clearer copies of the documents, legible documents within four (4) weeks from today.

2. The plaintiffs are exempted from filing originals at this stage.

3. The application stands disposed of.

O.A. 54/2024 (under Chapter II Rule 5 of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018 I.A. 6018/2024 (seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal I.A. 6020/2024 (seeking stay of the operation of order dated 15^th September, 2023

4. O.A. 54/2024 has been filed impugning the order passed by the Joint Registrar dated 15^th September, 2023 (‘impugned order’), whereby the right of the defendant to file written statement had been closed.

5. The appeal is accompanied by an application being I.A. 6018/2024 seeking condonation of delay of 120 days in filing the aforesaid appeal.

6. I.A. 6020/2024 has been filed seeking stay of the impugned order.

7. It is the case of the appellant that the appellant was served with the summons of the suit on 22^nd February, 2022. He submits that since the service was made during the COVID period, the 90-day period for filing the written statement would commence from 1^st March, 2022.

8. It is submitted that in June 2022, this Court was closed for its summer vacation and the Court reopened on 4^th July, 2022 on which date the written statement was filed.

9. Per contra, Mr. Nath, counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiff does not contest the fact that period for filing the written statement would begin from 1^st March, 2022. However, he makes the following submissions:-

i. The written statement was filed on 4^th July 2022 without any application seeking condonation of delay when admittedly the written statement was filed after 30 days. The application seeking condonation of delay was filed only on 4^th August, 2023.

ii. No explanation has been given in the said application as to why the written statement was not filed within thirty (30) days.

iii. The application proceeds on a wrongful presumption that the period of filing the written statement is ninety (90) days whereas the prescribed time for filing the written statement is 30 days from the service of summons.

iv. There is an admission in the application that there has been a total delay of 124 days i.e. 90 days + 34 days.

v. There is an undue delay of 124 days in filing the present appeal and no bona fide reasons have been given for the same.

10. I have heard counsel for the parties.

11. A perusal of the application filed on behalf of the defendant seeking condonation of delay shows that the same was filed only on 4^th August, 2023, even though the written statement was filed on 4^th July, 2022. Till that point of time, the defendant never deemed it appropriate to file an application seeking condonation of delay even though the written statement was admittedly filed beyond 30 days.

12. It is inexplicable that the application proceeds on a basis that the time period for filing the written statement is ninety (90) days. In this regard, reference may be made to paragraph no. 9 of the application (I.A. 14678/2023) for condonation of delay in filing the written statement, which is set out below:

“9. Thus, inview of the aforesaid, thelimitationperiodfor filingof the present Written Statement began from 01.03.2022onwards. That in view of the same the period of 90 days for filing of Written Statement concluded on 30.05.2022. Therefore, there has been a delay of 34 days in filing the Written Statement and such delay was neithe