Order 10

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: CS (COMM) 295/24
JAMMU AND KASHMIR BANK
VS.
AMIT NEGI
17.03.2025
Present: Sh. Shiven Mishra and Sh. Ankit Srivastava, Ld. Counsels for
plaintiff along with AR Sh. Ravi Kant Sharma.
Sh. Ankur Kardam, Ld. Counsel for defendant no. 1 and 2 along
with defendant no.1.
Sh. Yashpal, Ld. Counsel for defendant no. 3.
Affidavit of evidence filed. Copy of the affidavit of evidence has been
supplied.
An application under Section 151 CPC filed on behalf of plaintiff for
substitution of AR. It is stated that the earlier AR Sh. Sumit Mahajan has been
transferred and therefore, now the plaintiff wishes to pursue the present case through
new AR Sh. Ravi Kant Sharma. Along with application, copy of power of attorney
in favour of Sh. Ravi Kant Sharma also filed. Copy of application supplied to the ld.
counsels for defendants.
Ld. counsels for defendants submit that they do not wish to file any
reply to the said application and have no objection if the said application is allowed.
In the interest of justice, application is allowed and the plaintiff is
permitted to pursue the present case through its new AR Sh. Ravi Kant Sharma.
Application under Section 151 CPC filed on behalf of plaintiff for substitution of
AR stands disposed off accordingly.
Another application under Section 151 CPC filed on behalf of plaintiff
for removal of defects and for taking on record fresh WS, statement of truth and
-- 1 of 3 --
affidavit of admission and denial on record along with supporting affidavit. Copy
supplied.
Fresh vakalatnama also filed on behalf of defendant.
Ld. Counsel for plaintiff submits that he does not wish to file any reply
to the said application and he submits that application be considered as per rules and
law.
Through, this application, the defendant no. 3 has stated that the earlier
WS was not signed on each and every page, the statement of truth filed by the
defendant along with earlier WS was also not as per Appendix-I Order VI Rule 15A
and Order XI Rule 3 CPC. Further, the affidavit of admission and denial was also
not as per correct format and therefore, the defendant no.3 wishes to file fresh WS
affidavit signed on each and every page along with supporting. It is stated that the
contents of the WS has not been changed and it is only that earlier WS was not
signed on each and every page and therefore, the fresh WS has been filed which is
signed on each and every page. It was observed in order dated 28.01.2025 also, that
this fact was brought to the notice of the defendant no. 3 vide order dated
25.10.2024 that WS filed on behalf of defendant no. 3 was not signed on each and
every page, statement of truth was not as per Appendix-I Order VI Rule 15A and
affidavit of admission and denial was also not as per Order XI Rule 4 CPC and the
counsel has sought time to do the needful, but, still no fresh affidavit of admission
and denial has been filed on behalf of defendant no. 3. Nor, defendant no. 3
appeared to sign WS on each and every page. The earlier WS along with affidavit
of admission and denial was filed within the stipulated period of 30 days, but, the
same was not signed on each and every page. In
Robin Thapa v. Rohit Dora, Civil
Appeal No.4507/2019 decided on 8th July, 2019 it has been held by the Supreme
Court that the endeavour of the Court has to be to decide disputes on merits and not
on the defaults of the parties. The relevant paragraph reads as under:
-- 2 of 3 --
“8. Ordinarily, a litigation is based on adjudication on the merits
of the contentions of the parties. Litigation should not be
terminated by default, either of the plaintiff or of the defendant.
The cause of action does require that as far as possible,
adjudication be done on merits.”
Considering the fact that earlier WS was filed within 30 days and the
defects which have been pointed by the court were only procedural defects and in
the interest of justice, the application under Section 151 CPC filed by the defendant
no. 3 is allowed, subject to cost of Rs.4,000/- payable to the plaintiff.
Previous cost of Rs.4,000/- each paid by the defendant no. 1 and 2 to
the plaintiff. Ld. counsel for defendant no. 3 submits that they will pay the cost on
the next date of hearing.
The fresh WS, statement of truth and affidavit of admission and denial
on record along with supporting affidavit are taken on record. Application under
Section 151 CPC stands disposed off accordingly. Affidavit of evidence of PW-1
tendered and examined. Cross examination is deferred at the request of counsels for
defendants.
Put up for cross of PW-1 and DE on date already i.e. 25.03.2025.
(Kiran Bansal)
District Judge, Commercial Court-02,
Shahdara District, Karkardooma Courts,
Delhi / 17.03.2025
-- 3 of 3 --