Allowed

Rajiv Khanna (Since Deceasedj) through Lr. v. M/S. Tsg International Marketing Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Delhi HC17 Jan 2025FAO (COMM)/10/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against rejection of condonation of 11-month delay in a restoration application after the suit was dismissed in default. Holding that prosecuting legal remedies is a fundamental right and the delay short, the court allowed the appeal, subject to costs, restored the suit and quashed the trial court's order.

What the court decided

AI extract

Rajiv Khanna (Since Deceasedj) through Lr. Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~29

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- FAO (COMM) 10/2025, CM APPLs. 2035/2025, 2036/2025 & 2037/2025

¶4

RAJIV KHANNA (SINCE DECEASEDJ) THROUGH LR. .....Appellant Through: Mr. Aayushman Gauba and Mr. Dhruv Goyal, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

M/S. TSG INTERNATIONAL MARKETING PVT LTD. & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Vipin Singhania and Mr. Diwakar Chirania, Advs.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL

¶8

ORDER (ORAL) % 17.01.2025

¶9

C.HARI SHANKAR, J.

¶10

1. The impugned order passed by the learned Trial Court rejects an application for condonation of 11 months delay in filing restoration application to restore the suit which was dismissed in default for nonprosecution on 16 August 2023.

¶11

2. The stand taken by the appellant before the learned Trial Court was that there was negligence on the part of his counsel, which resulted in the default in appearance.

¶12

Signature Not Verified

¶13

Signed By:MEENU FAO (COMM) 10/2025 KALRA Signing Da te:2 4.01.2025 14:51:48

¶14

Page 1 of 3

¶15

3. Mr. Vipin Singhania, learned Counsel for the respondent submits that it is now common practice to blame Counsel for delay in approaching the Court.

¶16

4. We do not wish to enter into this thicket, as the delay in filing the restoration application is only of 11 months.

¶17

5. The right to prosecute legal remedies is a fundamental right under our constitutional scheme. It should not, therefore, save and except where there is no other option, be jettisoned.

¶18

6. In view thereof, we are of the opinion that, given the fact that the delay in filing the restoration application is only of 11 months, the interests of justice would be best subserved if the present application is allowed, subject to terms.

¶19

7. Accordingly, subject to the appellant paying costs of ₹25,000/to the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within a period of four weeks from today, the impugned order dated 9 October 2024 passed by the learned District Judge (Commercial) is quashed and set aside.

¶20

8. CS DJ 71/2022 stands restored to the Court of the learned District Judge (Commercial) who will proceed with the suit in accordance with law.

¶21

9. This appeal stands allowed in the aforesaid terms. Pending

¶22

Signature Not Verified

¶23

Signed By:MEENU FAO (COMM) 10/2025 KALRA Signing Da te:2 4.01.2025 14:51:48

¶24

Page 2 of 3

¶25

applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶26

C.HARI SHANKAR, J.

¶27

AJAY DIGPAUL, J.

¶28

JANUARY 17, 2025 ssc

¶29

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

Signed By:MEENU FAO (COMM) 10/2025 KALRA Signing Da te:2 4.01.2025 14:51:48

¶32

Page 3 of 3

Rajiv Khanna (Since Deceasedj) through Lr. v. M/S. Tsg International Marketing Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Rajiv Khanna (Since Deceasedj) through Lr. v. M/S. Tsg International Marketing Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Gomes Vs New Delhi Municipal Council (Ndmc) and Ors.

Jasbir Singh Bhalla & Anr. Vs UOI & Ors.

Staff Selection Commission & Ors. Vs Amit Kumar

Dr Pankaj Kumar Vs Rp Misra & Ors.

Suvidha Yadav Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Union of India & Ors. Vs Ravi Prakash