(Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ.)
Bharat Kalra _____________________________________ Appellant;
v.
Raj Kishan Chabra _________________________________ Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 3788 of 2022 (@ SLP(C) No. 63 of 2022), decided on May 9, 2022
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Leave granted.
2. The challenge in the present appeal is to an order passed by the High Court on 12.08.2021 whereby delay of 193 days in filing of the written statement was not condoned.
3. Admittedly, the suit for injunction filed by the plaintiff is not the one which is governed by the Commercial Court Act, 2015. Therefore, the time limit for filing of the written statement under Order VIII Rule 1 of CPC is not mandatory in view of the judgment of this Court reported as ‘Kailash v. Nankhu’ reported in (2005) 4 SCC 480.
4. In view of the aforesaid judgment, we find that the delay in filing of the written statement could very well be compensated with costs but denying the benefit of filing of the written statement is unreasonable.
5. Consequently, we allow the present appeal. The order passed by the High Court is set aside. The written statement already filed is taken on record.
6. We do hope that the trial Court shall expedite the decision of the suit keeping in view the old age of the plaintiff.
7. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 63/2022
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 12-08-2021 in CMM No. 429/2021 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi)
Bharat Kalra.….Petitioner(s)
v.
Raj Kishan Chabra.….Respondent(s)
(IA No. 698/2022 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT)
Date: 09-05-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today.
(Before Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ.)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Gaurav Kumar Dalal, Adv.
Mr. Pradeep Teotia, Adv.
Mr. Ashok Bannidinni, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Shrey Ashat, Adv.
Ms. Preetika Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Vikrant Mehta, Adv.
Mr. Sudhir Naagar, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
ORDER
8. Leave granted.
9. The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.
10. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
———
