Order 8

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 8 CS DJ 405/23 KULDEEP SHARMA Vs. MUKESH SHARMA
07.08.2025.
Present: Sh. Tanuj Sharma alongwith Sh. Vichitra Kumar, Ld.
Counsel for plaintiff alongwith plaintiff.
Sh. Sumit Bhardwaj, Ld. Counsel for defendant alongwith
defendant.
An application u/o 8 Rule 1 CPC is pending as filed on
behalf of the defendant. It is submitted that no reply in writing is to be
filed, however, application is contested orally and opposed heavily on
the ground of delay.
Record is perused.
It is admitted on behalf of the plaintiff that copy of the
plaint though supplied a number of times earlier, was supplied on
03.04.2024 after order dated 28.02.2024. Accordingly, if this date is
taken as date of the service to the defendant, WS ought to have been
filed on record by 03.05.2024 but the same was e-filed only on
18.11.2024. Even if it is accepted that it could not be filed on
01.08.2024 for requirement of the same to be e-filed, there exist delay
on the part of defendant in filing the written statement. In the
application u/o 8 Rule 1 CPC, no reason is assigned for delay, however,
at this stage, Ld. Counsel for the defendant submits that WS of the
defendant may be allowed to be brought on record and defendant may
deposit the sum or pay the cost, if any, ordered by this Court to show his
bonafide. Accordingly, considering that case ought to be decided on
merits rather on technical ground and that defendant is also willing to
go by terms imposed by the Court to the defendant, the application u/o 8
Rule 1 CPC is allowed subject to condition that defendant deposits the
sum of Rs 1 lac in the name of plaintiff in the form of FDR within 7
-- 1 of 2 --
-2-
working days from today, which is clarified to be retained on record and
would be realized in favour of one or the other parties subject to the
outcome of the case.
Application stands disposed off.
Subject to compliance of this condition, WS shall stand
taken on record. Meanwhile, replication, if any, be filed after supplying
advance copy to the opposite counsel against acknowledgment.
Hearing the parties, it also clear that at this stage that
defendant is not willing to explore the chances of amicable settlement.
Accordingly, case is fixed for filing of the original documents, if any,
admission/denial and for framing of issues for 27.11.2025.
Parties are at liberty to file affidavit qua admission or
denial.
(Aanchal)
District Judge-03, Rohini Courts
North District, Delhi
07.08.2025(amt)
-- 2 of 2 --