DEEPAK SALUJA vs SPG CONSUMER PRODUCT PVT LTD

2023-12-11 Information

$~2
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 11.12.2023

+ CM(M) 1961/2023, CM APPL. 61350/2023 & CM APPL. 61351/2023
DEEPAK SALUJA ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ankit Rathi and Mr. Sahil Rana, Advocates
versus

SPG CONSUMER PRODUCT PVT LTD ….. Respondent
Through: Mr. Bikram Singh Patel and Mr. Aditya Raghav Bundela, Advocates with AR of Respondent Company
%
CORAM:
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
J U D G M E N T

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J (ORAL):
CM APPL. 61351/2023 (for exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.
CM(M) 1961/2023, CM APPL. 61350/2023
1. This Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the order(s) dated 28.08.2023 and 16.10.2023 passed by District Judge (Commercial Court-08), Central District, Tis Hazari, Delhi (Commercial Court), in CS(COMM) 631/2023, titled as SPG Consumer Products Pvt. Ltd. v. Deepak Saluja.
1.1. The Petitioner is the defendant and the Respondent is the plaintiff before the Commercial Court.
1.2. The Respondent herein has filed a commercial suit for recovery of Rs. 6,74,890/- along with interest at 18% per annum till the realisation on 11.04.2020. The summons in the suit was served on the Petitioner in person on 27.04.2023 and through speed-post on 02.05.2023. The written statement was filed on 24.08.2023 i.e., the 119th day from 27.04.2023 without an accompanying application seeking condonation of delay.
1.3. Thereafter, the Petitioner moved two (2) applications both dated 22.09.2023; (i) seeking recall of the order dated 28.08.2023 and (ii) under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC seeking condonation of delay in filing the written statement.
1.4. Vide the impugned order dated 28.08.2023 the written statement of the defendant i.e. the Petitioner herein was taken off the record by the Trial Court, since the same was not initially accompanied with a condonation of delay application.
1.5. Vide the impugned order dated 16.10.2023 the Trial Court dismissed the application filed by the defendant under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC seeking condonation of delay in filing the written statement.
2. The learned counsel for the Petitioner states that he has placed on record an affidavit dated 06.12.2023 explaining the circumstances in which there was a delay of 89 days beyond the initial period of 30 days in filing the written statement.
3.1 He states that the written statement has been filed within a period of 120 days i.e., the statutory period of limitation. He states that he has also brought to the Court a demand draft of Rs. 25,000/- to compensate the Respondent for the delay in filing the written statement.
3. The learned counsel for the Respondent has entered appearance. He states that in the interest of expediting the suit proceedings, the Respondent, without admitting to the contents of the affidavit dated 06.12.2023 is willing to accept the costs and consent to the written statement being taken on record, subject to the Petitioner being put to strict terms of cooperating in expeditious disposal of the suit.
4. With the consent of the parties and in view of the judgment of this Court in Sundeep Bhupinder Singh & Anr. v. Oxon Technology Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., 2022:DHC;3989, the following directions are issued: –
i. The Petitioner herein will file a fresh affidavit of admission/denial of the documents filed with the plaint, as per the statutory format applicable to the Commercial Suit on or before 19.12.2023.
ii. Subject to the Petitioner filing the aforesaid affidavit of admission/denial of documents within the time granted, the Respondent herein will file its replication and affidavit of admission/denial of documents filed with the written statement, within four (4) weeks thereof.
iii. The Petitioner undertakes to this Court that he shall remain duly represented before the Trial Court on each date and not seek any unnecessary adjournments before the Trial Court; so as to facilitate the expeditious disposal of the suit. The said statement is taken on record and the Petitioner is bound down to the same.
5. The learned counsel for the Respondent has accepted the demand draft for the costs of Rs. 25,000/- during the course of the hearing.
6. It is directed that if the Petitioner files the affidavit of admission/denial of documents on or before 19.12.2023, his written statement along with the affidavit of admission /denial of documents will be taken on record in supersession of the order dated 28.08.2023 and 16.10.2023. And the suit shall be decided on merits in accordance with law.
7. It is clarified that in case the Petitioner fails to file the said affidavit, the opportunity granted by this Court shall stand forfeited and the Trial Courts orders dated 28.08.2023 and 16.10.2023 shall operate and bind the parties.
8. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition is disposed of. Pending applications stand disposed of.
9. The digitally signed copy of this order, duly uploaded on the official website of the Delhi High Court, www.delhihighcourt.nic.in, shall be treated as a certified copy of the order for the purpose of ensuring compliance. No physical copy of order shall be insisted by any authority/entity or litigant.

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J
DECEMBER 11, 2023/msh/sk
Click here to check corrigendum, if any

CM(M) 1961/2023 Page 2 of 2