Allowed

M/S Sparsh Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S Dev Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Delhi HC19 Feb 2016FAO(OS)/164/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed applications to condone delay in filing appeals. It set aside a second order that had closed the appellants' right to file written statements, granting them 30 days to file written statements instead.

What did the court decide?

Applications to condone delay allowed; right to file written statement restored; written statements to be filed within 30 days.

M/S Sparsh Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Dev… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

Signature Not Verified FAO(OS) Nos. 127/2015,162/2015,164/2015 and 168/2015 Digitally Signed By:AM UL YA

¶2

M/S DEV INFRASTRUCTURES PVT LTD & ORS Respondent Represented by: Mr.Dhananjay Shahi, Adv.

¶3

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

¶4

ORDER % 19.02.2016

¶5

CM 6099/2016 (by R-1 & R-2) in FAOCOS) 127/2015

¶6

For the reasons stated in the application 118 days delay in filing reply to the appeal and reply to CM Nos.5125-5126/2015 is condoned. 2. The replies filed are taken on record.

¶7

CM 6096/2016 (by R-1 & R-2^ in FAGIOS) 162/2015

¶8

For the reasons stated in the application 118 days delay in filing reply to the appeal and reply to CM Nos.6309-6310/2015 is condoned. 2. The replies filed are taken on record.

¶9

CM 6098/2016 (by R-1 & R-21 in FAOCOS) 164/2015

¶10

For the reasons stated in the application 118 days delay in filing reply to the appeal and reply to CM Nos.6315-6316/2015 is condoned.

¶11

The replies filed are taken on record.

¶12

CM 6100/2016 (by R-1 & R-2) in FAOIOS) 168/2015

¶13

For the reasons stated in the application 118 days delay in filing reply to the appeal and reply to CM Nos.6341-6342/2015 is condoned.

¶14

The replies filed are taken on record.

¶15

CM 5126/2015 Idelav) in FAOtOS^ 127/2015 CM 6310/2015 rdelavl in FAOtOS) 162/2015 CM 6316/2015 Idelavl in FAOtOS^ 164/2015 CM 6342/2015 tdelay) in FAOtOS^ 168/2015

¶16

FAO(OS) Nos. 127/2015,162/2015,164/2015 and 168/2015

¶17

Page 2 of 4

¶18

¶19

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and noting that delay in filing the appeals is of 2 days pertaining to FAO(OS) 127/2015 & FAO(OS) 168/2015 and 35 days in FAO(OS) 162/2015 & FAO(OS) 164/2015, we condone the delay in filing the appeals.

¶20

Applications are allowed.

¶21

FAOrOS^ 127/2015 FAOrOSi 162/2015 FAOrOSi 164/2015 FAOfOSi 168/2015

¶22

Learned counsel for the appellants does not press the appeals concerning the view taken by the learned Single Judge that M/s.Jainco Developers Pvt. Ltd. and M/s.Sparsh Builders Pvt.Ltd. are necessary parties in the suit. However, counsel states that on account of the fact that applications filed by the two appellants under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) were pending, written statement was not filed. On January 15, 2015 the applications filed by the appellants under Order I Rule 10 of the CPC praying that their names be deleted from array of defendants was dismissed and simultaneously on same day right to file written statement was closed.

¶23

Having perused the record of the suit and finding that applications filed by the appellants under Order I Rule 10 CPC for deletion of their names were filed in the year 2013 but unfortunately could not be decided expeditiously; and were decided on January 15, 2015, interest of justice warranted that 30 days time ought to have been granted to appellants to file written statements.

¶24

We dispose of the appeals setting aside the second order penned in the

¶25

FAO(OS) Nos. 127/2015,162/2015,164/2015 and 168/2015

¶26

Page 3 of 4

¶27

¶28

suit on January 15, 2015 closing right of the appellants to file the written statement.

¶29

Written statements shall positively be filed by the appellants within 30 days from today.

¶30

No cost.

¶31

CM 5125/2015 (u/O.XLI R.5) in FAOfOSl 127/2015 CM 6309/2015 fu/Q.XLI R.5) in FAOCOSJ 162/2015 CM 6315/2015 fu/O.XLI R.5J in FAOtOSl 164/2015 CM 6341/2015 (u/O.XLI R.5) in FAOCOSl 168/2015

¶32

Dismissed.

¶33

"TT

¶34

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. MUKTA GUPTA, J.

¶35

FEBRUARY 19,2016 'ga'

¶36

FAO(OS) Nos. 127/2015,162/2015,164/2015 and 168/2015

¶37

Page 4 of 4

M/S Sparsh Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S Dev Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Sparsh Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S Dev Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S National Highways Authority of India Vs Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd.

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Manish Kumar Gupta

National Highways Authority of India Vs M/S Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd.

Mulakh Raj Jain Vs Mahavir Vishwa Vidyapeeth Prabandh Samiti & Ors.

Surinder Mohan Talwar and Anr. Vs Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co. Ltd.

Jyotsna S Bires Vs Lt Col Amar Singh Sabharwal & Ors.

Vipen Kumar Parwanda & Anr. Vs Gunjan Kumar

M/S Bdr Lifesciences Pvt. Ltd. Vs Bristol-Myers Squibb Company & Anr.

Raju Kumar & Anr. Vs State

Bengal Waterproof Ltd. Vs UOI and Anr.

Assets Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd. Vs M/S Mcraj Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Kanwal Kapoor Vs the Punjab & Sind Bank & Ors.

M/S Cantronics Office Equipment Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors.

M/S Jainco Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs M/S Dev Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.