SH. AMIT MITTAL vs KRISHIV POLY PRODUCTS LLP

Judgment text excerpt

$~101 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 12th August, 2025 + CM(M) 2111/2024, CM APPL. 15918/2024, CM APPL. 2594/2025, CM APPL. 2595/2025 & CM APPL. 3605/2025 SH. AMIT MITTAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Tushar Rohmetra and Mr. Anubhav Sharma, Advocates versus KRISHIV POLY PRODUCTS LLP .....Respondents Through: Mr. Avneesh Arputham and Mr. Ankit Sharma, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner is defending a suit which is commercial in nature. 2. The aforesaid suit was taken by the learned Trial Court on 31.08.2023. It heard arguments on the application moved by the defendant under Order VII Rule 11 CPC whereby he was seeking rejection of the plaint on the ground of limitation. 3. However, while hearing further arguments, learned counsel for defendant himself, very fairly, conceded before the learned Trial Court that suit was within limitation and, therefore, his said application moved under Order VII Rule 11 CPC was dismissed. 4. Thereafter, petitioner i.e. defendant moved an application under Section 151 CPC praying therein that such order dated 31.08.2023 may be recalled and learned Trial Court dismissed the aforesaid application also. 5. Such order is under challenge. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 2111/2024 1 By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Date:13.08.2025 16:19:05 6. Admittedly, in the present case, the defendant did not file any written statement and, therefore, his written statement is not on record. Moreover, his defence has also been struck off already. 7. Such orders are not under challenge and, thus, attained finality. 8. The case is already at the stage of final arguments and since the defence of the defendant is already lying struck off, irrespective of the aforesaid observatio