M/S ARJAN DASS AND SONS PRIVATE LIMITED vs TINNA RUBBER AND INFRA LIMITED

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 07th July, 2025 CM(M) 1146/2025 & CM APPL. 38783-38784/2025 M/S ARJAN DASS AND SONS PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Satakshi Sood & Ms. Naimishi Verma, Advocates versus TINNA RUBBER AND INFRA LIMITED .....Respondent Through: Ms. Rachna Maheshwari, Advocate (Through VC) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner is defending a suit for recovery. 2. Initially, written statement was filed by the defendant. 3. During the pendency of the matter, an application was moved by defendant under Order VI Rule 17 CPC seeking amendment in the written statement. The aforesaid application was taken up by the learned Trial Court on 25.10.2024 and since the plaintiff had given its no objection to the aforesaid application, the application was allowed and defendant (petitioner herein) was directed to file amended written statement within a short period of one week and the matter was accordingly adjourned. 4. Fact remains that defendant did not file the amended written statement within the aforesaid given time and when they submitted the amended written statement later on, it was not taken on record