AMULAYA CHAWLA & ANR. vs ANIL KUMAR GUPTA

Judgment text excerpt

$~31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 30th April, 2026 + CM(M) 990/2026 AMULAYA CHAWLA & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Dr. Pankaj Garg, Mr. Yaksh Garg, Ms. Yashna Ahuja and Ms. Muskaan Chawla, Advocates. versus ANIL KUMAR GUPTA .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA ORDER (Oral) Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J. 1. This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode. CM APPL. 29096/2026 (for exemption) 2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of. CM(M) 990/2026 & CM APPL. 29095/2026 (for stay) 3. This is a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 assailing the order dated 07th March, 2026 passed by the learned Trial Court in CS SCJ No. 2450/2024, whereby an application filed by the petitioner/defendant under Order VIII Rule 1 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’) seeking condonation of delay in filing the written statement, has been dismissed. 4. Heard. Record perused. Signature Not Verified Signed By:VAISHALI CM(M) 990/2026 Page 1 of 4 CHAUHAN Signing Date:30.04.2026 16:35:58 5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the learned Trial Court has passed the impugned order on the basis of surmises and conjectures and the same is against the facts and law. It is further submitted that the denial of opportunity to file the written statement has resulted in grave prejudice to the petitioner. The delay in filing the written statement was not deliberate but occurred on account of bona fide prosecution of an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, therefore, prays that as there is sufficient reason for the delay in filing the written statement, so the delay be con