INDRANI BASU ROY vs JAGABANDHU BANERJEE

Judgment text excerpt

$~94 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 7th April, 2025 + CM(M) 649/2025 & CM APPL. 20561-20562/2025 INDRANI BASU ROY .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Amrik Singh, Advocate. versus JAGABANDHU BANERJEE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Swarup Sagar Roy, Advocate (through V.C.) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner is defending a suit for recovery and is aggrieved by order dated 09.12.2024 passed by the learned Trial Court observing that since the written statement has not been submitted within the statutory period and no application seeking condonation of delay has been filed either, her defence has been struck off. 2. According to learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant, there is a delay of mere two days, beyond the permissible outer limit of ninety days in filing the written statement and since the suit was regular in nature, not a commercial one, and since the provision with respect to filing of a written statement in a regular suit is merely directory in nature, the Court should have condoned the delay and should have taken the written statement on record. 3. Mr. Swarup Sagar Roy, learned counsel for respondent/plaintiff appears on advance notice. He submits that he is representing the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 649/2025 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:08.04.2025 16:08:20 respondent/plaintiff before the learned Trial Court also. He does admit the fact that when the matter was taken up on 09.12.2024 by the learned Trial Court, there was a delay of two days beyond the outer limit of ninety days. He, however, submits that no reason had been assigned by the petitioner/defendant as to why she had not filed the written statement within the initial permitted period and, therefore, though there