SHRI BHUSHAN KUMAR vs GAURAV

Judgment text excerpt

$~43 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 20th March, 2025 + CM(M) 522/2025 & CM APPL. 16305-16306/2025 SHRI BHUSHAN KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Tushar Sharma, Advocate. versus GAURAV .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner has filed a suit for recovery against defendant (respondent herein) seeking recovery of Rs.33 lacs approximately. 2. Petitioner/plaintiff is aggrieved by order dated 22.01.2025 whereby learned Trial Court, while allowing the application filed by defendant has permitted the written statement to be taken on record. 3. Admittedly, copy of plaint was supplied to defendant on 28.03.2023 and thereafter the matter was adjourned to 05.08.2023. On 05.08.2023, since the written statement had not been filed, the opportunity to file written statement was closed and the case was fixed for recording of plaintiff’s evidence. 4. In the interregnum, petitioner moved an application, albeit, under wrong provision of law. He submitted therein that he had engaged a new counsel and that copy of the plaint had been given by him to his previous counsel who had been representing him in the complaints filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 which were also between the same parties. However, the defendant was not satisfied with his previous counsel and when he asked for return of his file, the file was not returned to him by the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 522/2025 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:21.03.2025 17:59:45 previous counsel and, therefore, he was in no position to file written statement within the give time-frame. 5. It also needs to be mentioned that when the abovesaid application was taken up by learned Trial Court on 22.01.2025, t