SANTOSH SINGH vs SATVINDER KAUR

Judgment text excerpt

$~90 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 13th August, 2025 + CM(M) 1207/2025 & CM APPL. 40791-40792/2025 SANTOSH SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Vandana Rani, Advocate. versus SATVINDER KAUR .....Respondent Through: Ms. Ritika Babbar, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner is defending a summary suit. 2. Learned Trial Court heard the arguments on leave to defend and granted unconditional leave to defend vide order dated 14.05.2024. 3. Simultaneously, defendant (petitioner herein) was granted time of 30 days to file written statement and the matter was adjourned to14.08.2024. 4. Fact remains that the abovesaid direction given by the learned Trial Court to file written statement within a period of thirty days was not taken seriously enough by the defendant as he filed the written statement on the date fixed only i.e. on14.08.2024. 5. Learned Trial Court, in view of the abovesaid delay, has refused to take the written statement on record while observing that it was not even accompanied with any application seeking condonation of delay. In addition, his defence was also struck-off. 6. The present petition has been filed by the defendant with the prayer that the abovesaid order dated 14.08.2024 be set aside and he may be permitted to participate in the proceedings and his written statement may be taken on record and his defence may also be restored. 7. Admittedly, the petitioner should have been cautious enough and Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 1207/2025 1 By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Date:14.08.2025 15:41:54 should have ensured that the written statement was filed within the time granted by the Court. 8. However, the suit in question is a ‘regular suit’ and not a commercial one and, ther