Single judge order disposing of an appeal against a civil court order. The court waived costs without issuing a notice, clarified the impugned order did not lay down legal ratio, and recorded facts regarding service and delay.
Costs imposed in the appeal are waived. No notice issued. Impugned order clarified not to lay down legal ratio.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~32
SUNIL ALAGH ..... Appellant Through Mr. Manav Gupta and Mr. Prabhasahay Kaur, Mr. Sahil Garg, Ms. Esha Dutta, Advs.
versus
SHIVRAJ PURI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through Mr. Counsel (appearance not given)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR
% 07.02.2018
We have heard counsel for the appellant.
It is submitted that the reasoning given in the impugned order requires consideration on two issues. Firstly, whether or not the plaint and the documents were served with the summons on the defendant is a question of fact and should have been ascertained and decided. Self serving statement given by the defendant that they were not served with the plaint and the documents, was not sufficient. Secondly, there was deliberate delay on the part of the defendant in making a request for supply of a copy of the plaint and the documents. The defendant was served with the summons in the suit on 11.12.2016. Power of Attorney dated 13.01.2017 was filed on 16.01.2017. Pertinently, no appearance was made by the defendant before the Joint Registrar on
13.01.2017. Request for supply of copy of the plaint and the documents was made on 10.04.2017. The defendant should have immediately, by writing a letter, asked for a copy of the plaint and documents. In such circumstances, even if the period of 120 days had not expired, extension of time should not have been granted.
However, counsel for the appellant submits that he would be satisfied if the costs are waived, as the issue of delay and default in filing of the written statement and whether there was delay beyond 120 days, would delay the proceedings.
We accordingly are not issuing any notice in the present appeal but would waive the costs imposed. We would also clarify that the impugned order dated 14.12.2017 is based on facts and would not be treated as laying down any legal ratio, one way or the other.
Recording the above, the present appeal stands disposed of.
SANJIV KHANNA, J
CHANDER SHEKHAR, J
FEBRUARY 07, 2018 b
SUNIL ALAGH
SHIVRAJ PURI
SANJIV KHANNA
CHANDER SHEKHAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
