NAMPAL SINGH & ANR. vs SH RAMESH CHAND

Judgment text excerpt

$~76 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 25th March, 2025 + CM(M) 3745/2024 & CM APPL. 63890/2024 & CM APPL. 63892/2024 NAMPAL SINGH & ANR. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Hargovind Jha, Advocate. versus SH RAMESH CHAND .....Respondent Through: Mr. P K Jain, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioners are defending a suit for recovery and are aggrieved by order dated 15.05.2024 whereby their application moved under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC has been dismissed and, resultantly, the written statement has not been taken on record. 2. Fact remains that though their right to file written statement was also closed by the learned Trial Court after the abovesaid order was passed, the defendants and their counsel themselves appeared before the Court same day and were even informed by the learned Trial Court about the next date of hearing and the purpose. However, despite that, the written statement was submitted by them belatedly i.e. on 12.07.2024. 3. The defendant were, reportedly, served on 19.02.2024 and, therefore, there is apparently delay in filing the written statement. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 3745/2024 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:26.03.2025 18:12:11 4. This Court has seen the reasons mentioned by the defendants whereby they had sought condonation of delay. This Court is also mindful of the fact that the suit in question is a regular suit i.e. Non-Commercial suit and the petitioner, inter alia, seeks recovery of principal amount of Rs. 6,00,000/-. 5. Mr. Jain, learned counsel for respondent appears on advance notice and submits that there is no illegality in the order and rather the defendant themselves are to be blamed for their miseries as despite being fully aware about the above