Prathiba M. Singh, J. - (1.) This is an application under order VIII Rule 1 read with Section 151 of CPC. The relief prayed in the application is that the written statement filed by the Defendant No.1 on 30th March, 2019 ought to be taken off the record and judgment should be pronounced against the Defendant.
(2.) Perusal of the application shows that it is based on the averment that there was one written statement filed by the Defendant No. 1 on 14th March, 2019 which was returned under objections. Thereafter, a fresh written statement was filed on 30th March, 2019 which is 186 pages long. The vakalatnama was filed only on 9th May, 2019. Since, the summons in the suit was issued on 16th November, 2018, the last date to file the written statement was 15th, March, 2019. Thus, the written statement filed on 30th March, 2019 was beyond time and is not liable to be taken on record.
(3.) Further, it is submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the Plaintiff that the second written statement having been filed, the first written statement running into 58 pages stands abandoned. It is further submitted that as per the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018 (hereinafter Original Side Rules'), it is incumbent upon the Defendant to file the written statement along with the affidavit of admission/denial. In the present case the affidavit was not filed and hence on this ground also the written statement is not liable to be taken on record. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in SCG Contracts India Pvt. Ltd. vs. K.S. Chamankar Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. [Civil appeal No. 1638/2019 decided on 12th February 2019] (hereinafter "SCG Contracts") which holds that the timelines prescribed under the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division And Commercial Appellate Division Of High Courts Act, 2015 are mandatory insofar as the filing of written statements are concerned. The Ld. Counsel also submits that the vakalatnama having been filed almost two months after the written statement, the written statement even if filed on 14th March, 2019, was completely irregular and the ld. counsel who filed the said written statement did not have any authority to file the same on behalf of its client. Accordingly, prayer under Order VIII Rule 10 is made.;