Bombay High Court Condones 75-Day Delay in Filing Written Statement
Court Rules Limitation Period Begins from Service of Writ of Summons, Not Filing of Vakalatnama
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has condoned a 75-day delay in filing a written statement by Gautam Dham Co-operative Housing Society Limited, the defendant in a non-commercial suit. The decision, delivered by Justice Jitendra Jain, clarifies the calculation of the limitation period for filing a written statement under Order VIII Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.
The case revolves around an interim application seeking condonation of delay in filing the written statement. The defendant argued that the delay was due to lapses in the advocate’s office, which inadvertently failed to inform them about the service of the writ of summons. The writ was served on March 8, 2023, but the statement was filed only on June 21, 2023.
The plaintiffs opposed the application, arguing that the limitation period should start from the date the vakalatnama was filed, which was June 11, 2021. They contended that the defendant should have proactively obtained the plaint from the court after filing the vakalatnama.
Justice Jain, after hearing both parties, concluded that the limitation period for filing a written statement begins from the date of service of the writ of summons along with the plaint, not from the filing of the vakalatnama. The judgment emphasized that the defendant could not file a defense without being served a copy of the plaint, thereby rejecting the plaintiffs' arguments for an earlier start of the limitation period.
The court also addressed the issue of sufficient cause for the delay, noting that the defendant, a society run by honorary members, took immediate steps once the lapse was discovered. Justice Jain ruled that litigants should not be penalized for lapses in their advocate's office, especially when the delay was minimal and remedial steps were promptly taken.
This ruling sets a precedent in interpreting the limitation period for non-commercial suits, providing clarity on the responsibilities of plaintiffs in serving the writ of summons and plaint to defendants. The judgment underscores the importance of ensuring defendants have the necessary documents to file their defense and reaffirms the court's discretion in condoning delays when justified.
Bottom Line:
Limitation for filing written statement in a non-commercial suit begins from the date the writ of summons and copy of the plaint are served on the defendant, not from the date of filing vakalatnama.
Statutory provision(s): Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Order VIII Rule 1, Bombay High Court (Original Side Rules), 1980 Rules 84, 87, 88
Gautam Dham Co-operative Housing Society Limited (Bombay) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2787220
