Sh. Bhim Sain Arora v. Smt Ram Kali Gupta

Delhi High Court · 22 Sep 2020 · 2020:DHC:2829
Sanjeev Sachdeva
CM (M) 419/2020
2020:DHC:2829
civil appeal_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner additional time to file a written statement in a loan recovery suit, setting aside the trial court's order closing the right to file it, subject to payment of costs.

Full Text
Translation output
CM (M) 419/2020
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
JUDGMENT
delivered on: 22nd September, 2020
CM(M) 419/2020& CM APPLN. 19265/2020
SH. BHIM SAIN ARORA ..... Petitioner
versus
SMT RAM KALI GUPTA ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Ms. Neha Kapoor, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mr. Shailendra Dahiya, Advocate
Ms. Kusum Dhalla, Addl. PP for the State
CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICESANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.

2. Petitioner impugns order dated 23.12.2019 whereby the right of the petitioner to file written statement has been closed and the application under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC dismissed.

3. Respondent had filed the subject Suit for recovery contending that he had given a friendly loan to the petitioner through banking transactions and since the loan was not repaid subject Suit was filed.

4. Petitioner was served in the Suit on 05.08.2019. On 13.09.2019, 2020:DHC:2829 petitioner contended before the trial court that he had not received the complete legible paper book. Accordingly, directions were issued to the respondent to provide a complete set of paper book and to petitioner to file the written statement within 30 days.

5. As per the petitioner, petitioner was arrested on 14.10.2019 and the Laptop of the petitioner was seized. Subject application was filed by the petitioner contending that since the Laptop contained all detail of transactions was seized, he was not in a position to file the Written Statement and as per his memory entire amount had been refunded.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that it was a simplicitor loan transaction and in case there was any payment of money, the same would have been reflected in the bank account of the petitioner.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that another reason for failure to file written statement was that Petitioner was incarcerated and he has now been granted bail by the Court and has been released. He accordingly prays that one opportunity be granted to the petitioner to file written statement subject to terms.

8. Learned counsel for the respondent prays that though there is no ground to enlarge the time, however, keeping in view of the expeditious disposal of the Suit, he has no objection in granting further time to the petitioner to file written statement subject to cost.

9. In view of the above, order dated 23.12.2019 is set aside. Petitioner is granted 30 days’ time to file Written Statement subject to payment of cost of Rs. 20,000/- to be paid to the respondent within 30 days from today.

10. Petition is allowed in the above terms.

11. Copy of the order be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to learned counsels through email by the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J SEPTEMBER 22, 2020 ‘rs’