Non-filing of Statement of Truth - Considered a procedural irregularity and a curable defect; does not render the pleading or filing non-est. Courts have consistently held that such defects can be rectified, and the filing remains valid if the defect is cured later. MS HIMALAYAN FLORA AND AROMA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs UTTAR PRADESH IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT & ANR. - Delhi, M/S MADHUCON PROJECTS LTD. vs M/S BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. - Kerala, RAJESH WADHAWAN Vs SH NAVEEN SABHARWAL - Delhi, MR N BABU REDDY vs M/S EIT SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED - Karnataka, PRAGATI CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANTS Vs UNION OF INDIA - Delhi
Nature of defect - The defect in not filing the Statement of Truth, such as missing attestation or signatures, is generally regarded as a procedural irregularity and not a substantive defect. The language of Order VI Rule 15A CPC is directory, allowing for correction and curing of such defects. MS HIMALAYAN FLORA AND AROMA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs UTTAR PRADESH IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT & ANR. - Delhi, M/S MADHUCON PROJECTS LTD. vs M/S BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. - Kerala, RAJESH WADHAWAN Vs SH NAVEEN SABHARWAL - Delhi, MR N BABU REDDY vs M/S EIT SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED - Karnataka, PRAGATI CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANTS Vs UNION OF INDIA - Delhi
Judicial stance - Courts, including High Courts and Tribunals, have emphasized that non-filing of the Statement of Truth is not fatal and can be rectified, especially when the party cooperates and seeks to cure the defect at a later stage. The courts have allowed amendments, condonation of delays, and have clarified that such procedural lapses do not invalidate pleadings or filings. MS HIMALAYAN FLORA AND AROMA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs UTTAR PRADESH IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT & ANR. - Delhi, M/S MADHUCON PROJECTS LTD. vs M/S BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. - Kerala, RAJESH WADHAWAN Vs SH NAVEEN SABHARWAL - Delhi, MR N BABU REDDY vs M/S EIT SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED - Karnataka, PRAGATI CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANTS Vs UNION OF INDIA - Delhi, Ssr International Through Its Propreitor Abhay Kumar Singhal VS Triveni Engineering And Industries Limited Sugar Unit Sabitga - Delhi
Effect on proceedings - Failure to file the Statement of Truth does not automatically lead to rejection or non-establishment of pleadings. Courts have consistently directed that such defects are curable and should be allowed to be rectified in the interest of justice. This approach promotes substantive justice over procedural technicalities. MS HIMALAYAN FLORA AND AROMA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs UTTAR PRADESH IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT & ANR. - Delhi, M/S MADHUCON PROJECTS LTD. vs M/S BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. - Kerala, RAJESH WADHAWAN Vs SH NAVEEN SABHARWAL - Delhi, MR N BABU REDDY vs M/S EIT SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED - Karnataka, PRAGATI CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANTS Vs UNION OF INDIA - Delhi
Analysis and Conclusion:The prevailing judicial view, supported by multiple rulings, is that the non-filing of the Statement of Truth along with pleadings like written statements or plaints is a procedural irregularity and a curable defect. Such defects do not render the pleadings non-est or invalid, provided the party seeks to rectify the defect within a reasonable time. Courts have emphasized the importance of substantive justice and have permitted amendments, condonation, and curing of procedural lapses related to the Statement of Truth, reaffirming that its non-filing is not an incurable defect.
