STATE BANK OF INDIA vs SHRI S C. GOEL

Judgment text excerpt

$~57 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 26.11.2025 + CM(M) 2278/2025, CM APPL.74206/2025 & 74207/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Jaya Tomar, Advocate versus SHRI S C. GOEL .....Respondent Through: None CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA O R D E R (ORAL) 1. This matter has been received in this post-lunch session through the second supplementary list after mentioning was allowed by the Hon’ble Chief Justice. 2. Petitioner/defendant bank has assailed order dated 18.10.2025 of the learned trial court, whereby application of the petitioner/defendant bank under Order VIII Rule 1A(3) CPC (filed after part final arguments were advanced in ten year old suit) was dismissed. Having heard learned counsel for petitioner/ defendant bank, I find no reason to even issue notice of this application. 3. Broadly speaking, the impugned order dismissed the application under Order VIII Rule 1A(3) CPC on the ground of no explanation as CM(M) 2278/2025 Page 1 of 5 pages Signature Not Verified GIRISH Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec4 5569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, KATHPALIA postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d155 70996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e2 Digitally Signed 6fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2025.11.26 17:48:17 -08'00' By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Date:26.11.2025 18:13:22 regards failure to file the documents at relevant stage and also on the ground that the petitioner/defendant bank is trying to plug loopholes, which were pointed out by the other side during final arguments. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner/defendant bank submits that the subject additional documents could not be filed at appropriate st