V.a.Kurien v. Liza Joseph and 2 Others
Case brief
What is this about?
C.S. No. 339 of 2021 - The court allowed the third defendant's application to condone 339 days delay in filing the written statement upon satisfaction of sufficient cause and the plaintiff's consent.
What did the court decide?
The application to condone delay of 339 days in filing the written statement is allowed and the Registry is directed to receive the same.
What the court decided
A.No.19 of 2023
A.No.19 of 2023 in C.S.No.339 of 2021
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.
The third defendant has filed this application to condone the delay of 339 days in filing the written statement. On instructions, learned counsel for the plaintiff states that he has no objection to this application being allowed.
- In the affidavit in support of this application, the third defendant has set out details of the interlocutory applications that were filed and contested by parties. It is stated that the written statement could not be filed because attention was focused entirely on contesting the interlocutory applications. Upon being satisfied that sufficient cause is shown, this application is allowed. Consequently, the Registry is directed to receive the written statement of the third defendant. The other defendants seek time to number and list applications to condone delay in filing the written statement.
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.
rna
1/2
A.No.19 of 2023
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the application to condone delay of 339 days in filing the written statement be allowed.
Whether sufficient cause exists for the delay in filing the written statement.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Third Defendant
- respondent
Plaintiff
- respondent
Other Defendants
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Mr.Hari Krishna Budhia Vs M/S.Evp Housing Chennai Pvt, Rep.by its Director, Mr.E.v.P.Santosha Reddy for itslef and also as
Mr.Hari Krishna Budhia Vs M/S.Evp Housing Chennai Pvt, Rep.by its Director, Mr.E.v.P.Santosha Reddy for itslef and also as
Hari Krishna Budhia Vs M/s. E.v.P.Housing Chennai Pvt. Ltd.
Mahalingam Sumitra Das Vs No Respondent