DELHI TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY AND ANR vs SH. RAHUL BANSAL AND ORS

Judgment text excerpt

$~58 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 25th March, 2025 + CM(M) 3026/2024 DELHI TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY AND ANR .....Petitioner Through: Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel with Ms. Palak Rohmetra, Ms. Laavanya Kaushik, Ms. Aliza Alam and Mr. Amitoj Chadha, Advocates. versus SH. RAHUL BANSAL AND ORS .....Respondent Through: Mr. Anuj Arya, Mr. Arpit Verma and Ms. Sakshi Mishra, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) CM(M) 3026/2024 & CM APPL. 17227/2025 (seeking early hearing) 1. Petitioner i.e. Delhi Technological University is defending a suit. 2. It was, admittedly, served with summons on 01.03.2024. 3. Instead of, immediately filing a written statement, it moved an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC contending that suit was barred by limitation. Such application was filed on 05.06.2024 and same day, such application was dismissed. 4. However, since the defendant-University had not filed any written statement, its defence was also directed to be struck off. 5. The defendant-University moved an application before the learned Trial Court under Section 151 CPC praying therein to condone the delay in Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 3026/2024 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:26.03.2025 17:46:32 filing written statement and to permit it to participate in the proceedings. 6. According to the learned counsel for petitioner, written statement was filed on 29.06.2024 i.e. within the outer permissible limit of 120 days. It is, very fairly, admitted that though the University should have been vigilant in the first instance and should have filed the written statement within the initial period of 30 days but since the petitioner had already filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC and the sa