M S AGGARWAL POLYMERS INDIA & ANR. vs M S SRI RAM PLASTOCHEM PVT LTD

Judgment text excerpt

$~70 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA(COMM) 331/2025, CM APPL. 34907/2025, CM APPL. 34908/2025 & CM APPL. 34909/2025 M S AGGARWAL POLYMERS INDIA & ANR. .....Appellants Through: Ms. Ruchi Gupta, Adv. versus M S SRI RAM PLASTOCHEM PVT LTD. ....Respondent Through: Mr. Manish Rathore, Ms. Komal Chhibber and Mr. Sahil Kalra, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 10.11.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J. CM APPL. 34909/2025 (Delay of 780 days in filing appeal) 1. This application seeks condonation of an inordinate delay of 780 days in filing RFA (Comm) 331/2025. 2. On the aspect of delay in commercial matters, the Supreme Court has taken an extremely strict view, as is reflected from the following passages from the decision in Government of Maharashtra v Borse Bros. Engineers & Contractors (P) Ltd1: “63. Given the aforesaid and the object of speedy disposal sought to be achieved both under the Arbitration Act and the Commercial Courts Act, for appeals filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act that are governed by Articles 116 and 117 of the 1 (2021) 6 SCC 460 Signature Not Verified Signed By:GUNN RFA(COMM) 331/2025 Page 1 of 12 Signing Date:13.11.2025 16:04:06 Limitation Act or Section 13(1-A) of the Commercial Courts Act, a delay beyond 90 days, 30 days or 60 days, respectively, is to be condoned by way of exception and not by way of rule. In a fit case in which a party has otherwise acted bona fide and not in a negligent manner, a short delay beyond such period can, in the discretion of the court, be condoned, always bearing in mind that the other side of the picture is that the opposite party may have acquired both in equity and justice, what may now be lost by the first party's inaction, negligence