Allowed

Mr.a.Mohammed Zackiullah v. Mr.Abhay Kumar Singhvi and 2 others

Madras HC24 Jul 2024A/3378/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court condoned the delay in filing the written statement for the first defendant in a specific performance suit. It observed that affording the defendant an opportunity to contest is in the interest of justice and causes no prejudice to the plaintiff. The written statement was ordered to be received.

What did the court decide?

Condoned the delay in filing the written statement and ordered its receipt;

Mr.a.Mohammed Zackiullah Vs Mr.Abhay Kumar Singhvi and 2… — Specific Performance | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

A.No.3378 of 2024 in C.S.No.768 of 2016

¶2

P.B.BALAJI, J.

¶3

This application has been filed to condone the delay of 1700 days in filing the written statement of the 1^st defendant in C.S.No.768 of 2016.

¶4

2.The 1^st respondent/plaintiff is also filed a counter affidavit.

¶5

3.I have heard Mr.R.Jayaprakash, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr.S.Rameshkumar, learned counsel for the respondents.

¶6

4.The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the suit summons were served only on 07.09.2019 and consequently, the delay has been correctly calculated. He further submits that the present counsel had filed change of vakalat pending the proceedings and therefore, he was under the bonafide impression that the written statement has already been filed. However, it subsequently came to the light that the written statement has not been filed. Hence, immediately this application was filed along with the written statement.

¶7

5.Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the evidence has already been concluded and the matter is now posted for arguments and at that stage, this application has been filed, that too, projecting a lesser number of days delay. According to the 1^st respondent/plaintiff, the delay is more than 2500 days.

¶8

6.I have carefully considered the rival submissions advanced by the

¶9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶10

learned counsel on either side.

¶11

7.The suit is for specific performance and the 1^st defendant is the owner of the property and therefore, in the interest of justice, it is expedite that the 1^st defendant is afforded an opportunity to contest the claim on merits. No prejudice would be caused to the 1^st respondent/plaintiff if he gets decree after contest. Therefore, in the interest of justice, this application is ordered and the delay in filing the written statement is condoned and the written statement is ordered to be received.

¶12

8.Post the matter on 26.07.2024 for filing draft issues.

¶13

24.07.2024

¶14

ata

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

P.B.BALAJI, J. ata

¶17

A.No.3378 of 2024 in C.S.No.768 of 2016

¶18

24.07.2024

¶19

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Mr.a.Mohammed Zackiullah v. Mr.Abhay Kumar Singhvi and 2 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.a.Mohammed Zackiullah v. Mr.Abhay Kumar Singhvi and 2 others

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

Chennai Runners Association Rep by its President Shahid Kandrikar, Vs The Trade Marks Registry

V.Alamelu and 2 others Vs C.Dakshinamoorthy (Deceased) 1.R.VIJAYA and 2 Others

R and D S.R.L. Vs Controller of Patents and Designs

M/s.Doshi Constructions Vs M/S. Mec Inernational Private Ltd.

Ashok Leyland Limited, Represented by its Managing Director Vs Arumugam Rajendra Babu

M/S. Vinsa Electricals Private Limited Vs Polar Mohr Maschinenvertriebsgesellschaft Gmbh and Co. Kg