B M TIWARI vs RAMDIN GUPTA

Judgment text excerpt

$~54 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 06th May, 2025 + CM(M) 635/2025 & CM APPL. 20194-20195/2025 B M TIWARI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shubham Sharma, Advocate. versus RAMDIN GUPTA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vikas Mishra, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. When the present petition was taken up on the last date of hearing i.e. 07.04.2025 the following observations were recorded:- “1. Petitioner is defending a commercial suit. 2. According to learned counsel for petitioner/defendant, he was served with summons on 25.09.2024 and, initially, written statement was filed through e-filing module on 25.10.2024 i.e. within the initial prescribed period of 30 days. Since softcopy was not complete in certain aspects, hardcopy was also placed before the learned Commercial Court on 07.11.2024. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner, very fairly, concedes that on account of inadvertence, the defendant could not place on record affidavit of admission/denial of documents but fact remains that such affidavit was also placed on record on 24.12.2024 and according to him, all the prescribed mandatory formalities were, thus, completed within the permissible outer limit of 120 days but despite that his written statement has been taken off the record. 4. He also submits that application had been moved by him under Order VI Rule 17 CPC by way of abundant caution only, and to ensure that all the requisite formalities are completed and with no other purpose.” 2. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for respondent/plaintiff, has joined the proceedings through video-conferencing and he, in all fairness, submits that the written statement as well as the affidavit of the admission/denial of the documents were furnished belatedly but within