A defendant cannot contest delay in representation before plaint numbering; the delay is a matter between the court and the litigant.

O R D E R

The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the Trial Court allowing the application in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in Filing No.COS.No. 85 of 2025 filed by the respondent/plaintiff seeking to condone the delay of 112 days in representing the returned plaint.

2. The plaint was submitted by the respondent seeking recovery of money against the petitioner. The plaint was returned on 12.02.2025 raising certain objections. The plaint was represented with a delay of 112 days. In the affidavit filed in support of the condone delay petition, it was stated by the respondent/plaintiff that in order to address the queries raised in the returned plaint, the respondent/plaintiff had to obtain statement of accounts from the Banker and Certificate under Sections 61 to 63 BSA for email communications and in the said process, the delay had occurred. Having satisfied with the reason assigned in the affidavit, the Trial Court condoned the delay of 112 days in representing the returned plaint. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner/defendant has come before Court.

3. It is seen from the records the delay in representation of unnumbered plaint has been condoned by the Trial Court. Before numbering the suit, the petitioner/defendant has no locus to oppose the delay.

4. It is settled law that the delay in representation is a matter between the Court and the litigant/plaintiff and before numbering of the plaint, the defendant cannot object to the condonation of delay in representation. Further, on merits also, the respondent/plaintiff has given convincing reason for condoning the delay. Therefore, I do not find any error in the impugned order passed by the Trial Court.

5. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected civil miscellaneous petition is closed.