Order 20

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: CS (COMM) No. 127/24
Raj Kumar Kapil
Vs.
M/s Antram Fisheries Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
22.09.2025
Present: Ms. Ayushi Aggarwal, Ld. Counsel for plaintiff (through
VC).
Ms. Kalpana Sharma, Ld. Counsel for plaintiff.
Mr. Amit Poonia, Ld. Counsel for defendant Nos. 1 to 4.
Heard.
Ld. Counsel for defendants has not any reply to application
filed by the plaintiff for seeking striking off defence of the defendant nos.
1 to 4, but has argued application directly.
Heard.
Ld. Counsel for plaintiff has argued that the defendants
have not filed any affidavit of admission-denial of documents in support
of their WS and now period of more than 120 days has already been
lapsed, due to defence of the defendants is liable to be struck off for the
want of any affidavit of admission-denial of documents. It is further
argued that WS of the defendants may be taken on record only if it is
accompanied with affidavit of admission-denial of documents in terms of
order 11 Rule 1 CPC, otherwise documents of the plaintiff shall be
considered to be admitted under Order 8 Rule 10 CPC. It is further
argued that since the defendants have failed to file any affidavit of
admission-denial of documents, accordingly their defence is liable to be
struck off.
On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for defendants has fairly
conceded that the defendants have failed to file affidavit of admission-
denial of documents along with WS, whereas he has opposed that suit of
the plaintiff is liable to be decreed on the basis of admission of
-- 1 of 3 --
-2-
documents in terms of Order 8 Rule 10 CPC. It is further argued that it
was just a technical error which may be rectified subsequently and the
plaintiff may be compensated in terms of money and this application is
liable to be dismissed.
I have heard the arguments and perused the record.
Admittedly, this case is a commercial suit filed under the
provisions of the Commercial Courts Act. The provisions of the
Commercial Courts Act and Delhi High Court Rules framed under the
Commercial Courts Act have full application to give a meaningful
interpretation to the Commercial Courts Act for expeditious disposal of
commercial cases.
The Hon’ble High Court has held in Unilin Beheer B. V.
Vs. Balaji Action Buildwell, 2019 SCC Onlie Del 12566, in Para 30 that
“
in the event of WS being filed without affidavit of admission-denial of
documents, not only shall the written statement be not taken on record
but the documents filed by the plaintiff shall also be deemed to be
admitted and on the basis of admission the Court shall be entitled to
proceed under Order 8 Rule 10 CPC of the CPC”, thereby meaning that
defence of the defendants may be struck off for not filing of affidavit of
admission-denial of documents along with WS within 120 days. A
similar proposition has been held in OK Play India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. A.P.
Distributors & Anr., 2021 SCC Online Del 4809, Mayank Gupta Vs.
Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Ltd., 2023 SCC Online Del 1485 and
Pooja Die Moulds Vs. Rajdhani Metal Store, CM (M) 496/2025
Admittedly, in this case, the defendant No. 5 has been
deleted from array of parties, whereas the defendant nos. 1 to 4 have filed
their WS without affidavits of admission-denial of documents, which
amounts to admission of documents in terms of Order 11 Rule 1 read
-- 2 of 3 --
-3-
with Order 8 Rule 10 of CPC. In fact, filing of affidavit of admission /
denial of documents is mandatory otherwise defence of the defendants
shall not be considered and shall be struck off in view of law laid down
by Hon’ble High Court in Unilin Beheer B. V. Vs. Balaji Action
Buildwell,
2019 SCC Del 12566. Accordingly, defence of the defendant
no. 1 to 4 is hereby struck off.
For the proper adjudication of the case, following point of
determinations are framed as under: -
ISSUES
1. Whether plaintiff is entitled for decree of amount of Rs.
14,14,615/- as prayed for? OPP
2. Whether plaintiff is entitled for interest against decretal
amount as prayed, if so, at what rate and for what period?
OPP
3. Relief.
No other issue arises or pressed.
Put up for PE on 27.10.2025. Advance copy of affidavit
shall be supplied to opposite party atleast 7 days prior to next date of
hearing.
(Devender Kumar)
District Judge (Commercial Court)-01
East District, Karkardooma
Courts, Delhi /22.09.2025
-- 3 of 3 --