Order 2

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 10
CS (COMM) 324/24
M/S CREATIX VENTURES Vs. M/S ALNIK MARKETING
TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.
24.05.2025
Present: Ms. Shraddha Kushwaha, Ld. counsel for the plaintiff
(through VC).
The defendant has not been served through the Process
Server on either of the addresses. The defendant is, however, served
through email on 18.12.2024. As per the net tracking report furnished
by the plaintiff, the defendant was served on 25.11.2024 and
29.11.2024. The date of service is, therefore, taken as 18.12.2024.
None has appeared on behalf of the defendant nor any written
statement has been filed. 120 days allowed by the CC Act to file
written statement, have lapsed. The right of the defendant to file
written statement is, therefore, forfeited. Since none has appeared, the
defendant is proceeded against ex-parte.
Under Order 8 Rule 10 CPC, in case WS is not filed in
the time permitted, the court shall pronounce judgment against the
defendant or pass any such order in relation to the suit as deemed fit.
The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has observed in order dated
03.03.2021 passed in CS (Comm.) No. 618/19 titled Parsvanath
Developers Ltd. Vs. Vikram Khosla as follows:
-- 1 of 2 --
The question which arises is whether the plaintiff should be directed to
lead ex-parte evidence. The Plaint having been verified and is also
supported with affidavit / Statement of Truth on behalf of the plaintiff,
and the defendant having been proceeded ex-parte no purpose would
be served if the plaintiff was directed to lead ex-parte evidence.
In Parsvanath's case (supra), the Hon'ble Court has
referred to an order passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in
Satya Infrastructure Ltd. and Ors. v. Satya Infra and Estates Pvt. Ltd.,
2013 (54) PTC 419 (Del), wherein it has been held as under:
4. I am of the opinion that no purpose will be served in such cases by
directing the plaintiffs to lead ex parte evidence in the form of
affidavit by way of examination-in chief and which invariably is a
repetition of the contents of the plaint. The plaint otherwise, as per the
amended CPC, besides being verified, is also supported by affidavits
of the plaintiffs. I fail to fathom any reason for according any
additional sanctity to the affidavit by way of examination-in-chief than
to the affidavit in support of the plaint or to any exhibit marks being
put on the documents which have been filed by the plaintiffs and are
already on record.
The plaint is accompanied by an affidavit as well as the
statement of truth. All the relevant documents are stated to have been
filed, although some are copies. There is thus no requirement of
recording ex-parte evidence. Ld. Counsel is directed to produce the
original documents. Matter be listed for perusal of the original
documents and ex-parte final arguments on 02.08.2025.
(RUBY ALKA GUPTA)
District Judge (Commercial Court)-02
East District/KKD Courts/Delhi
24.05.2025/A
-- 2 of 2 --