Order 7

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 14
CS 659/24
SHIVAM SAROHA Vs. NIRMAN VERMA
05.08.2025
Present : Sh. Sahil Jain, Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff through VC.
Sh. Deepak Kumar, Ld. Counsel for the defendant alongwith
defendant.
An application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed
on behalf of the defendant seeking condonation of delay in filing the written
statement.
Learned counsel for the plaintiff opposed the application,
submitting that no sufficient or reasonable ground has been mentioned for the
condonation of delay.
I have heard the learned counsel for both parties, carefully perused
the record, and considered the relevant legal provisions and judicial precedents
applicable to the present case.
As per record, summons were served upon the defendant on
10.02.2025, and the written statement was filed on 22.04.2025. It is evident that
the written statement has been filed within the prescribed period of 90 days
from the date of service of summons.
It is a settled proposition of law that procedural rules are
handmaids of justice and should not be applied so rigidly as to defeat the cause
of substantial justice. The minor delay, if any, can be suitably compensated by
imposition of costs.
Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the application under Section
5 of the Limitation Act is allowed, subject to payment of costs of 1,000/- by	₹
the defendant to the plaintiff.
Let the written statement be taken on record, subject to payment of
the said cost.
-- 1 of 2 --
The application stands disposed of.
Learned counsel for the plaintiff seeks an adjournment to file the
replication.
Put up for replication/further proceedings on 16.10.2025.
(Vikas Garg)
DJ-05/East/KKD
Delhi/05.08.2025
-- 2 of 2 --