SHASHIKANT vs BANK OF BARODA

Judgment text excerpt

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 20th March, 2025 + CM(M) 868/2023 & CM APPL. 27428/2023 SHASHIKANT .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Dikshant Khanna, Advocate. versus BANK OF BARODA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Kush Sharma, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Learned counsel for respondent appears on advance notice and submits that he is ready with the final arguments. 2. Petitioner was an employee of defendant bank (respondent herein) and as per the averments appearing in the plaint, the plaintiff resigned and sent communication in this regard on 03.08.2021. 3. The relief sought in the abovesaid suit is that it be declared that his such resignation was lawful and that the notice issued by Bank of Baroda/respondent, accusing him, being on unauthorized absence, be declared unlawful, void and of no consequences. 4. Besides the above, various other reliefs have also been sought in the suit. 5. The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 16.02.2023 whereby the learned Trial Court has condoned the delay in filing the written statement and Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 868/2023 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:24.03.2025 18:15:47 permitted the written statement to be taken on record. 6. This Court has gone through the abovesaid order and as per bare observations recorded therein, the plaintiff was directed to supply documents to the defendant on 27.04.2022. Thus, if the period of limitation is reckoned from 27.04.2022, the initial period of 30 days would have expired on 26.05.2022. Admittedly, as per Order VIII Rule 1 CPC, the period of filing of written statement is 90 days, in all. It is also no longer res integra that such period is not mandatory in nature and in appropriate cases, the delay