FARHANA SAMI vs DYNAMIK DEVELOPERS PVT LTD

Judgment text excerpt

$~47 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 06.11.2025 + CM(M) 2105/2025 & CM APPL. 68903/2025 FARHANA SAMI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Mansi Sharma, Advocate versus DYNAMIK DEVELOPERS PVT LTD .....Respondent Through: None CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA O R D E R (ORAL) 1. Petitioner/defendant has assailed order dated 23.09.2025 of the learned trial court, whereby her application for amendment of Written Statement was dismissed in view of bar under proviso to Order VI Rule 17 CPC. 2. It is contended on behalf of petitioner/defendant that being a home maker, she was dependent upon her husband for the transactions between the parties. It is further contended that when the Written Statement was filed, husband of the petitioner/defendant being in jail, she did not have knowledge of complete facts, therefore, could not plead as regards the payments already made by her to the respondent/plaintiff. It is only after her CM(M) 2105/2025 Page 1 of 3 pages GIRISH Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, Signature Not Verified 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6f b4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - KATHPALIA 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cb d2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Digitally Signed Date: 2025.11.06 13:22:59 -08'00' By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Date:06.11.2025 14:30:47 husband got released from jail that the petitioner/defendant came to know about the fact of payment of entire suit amount already done by her to the respondent/plaintiff. That being so, according to learned counsel for petitioner/defendant, the learned trial court fell in error in applying bar contemplated by proviso to Order VI Rule 17 CPC on her application