Karan Rana v. Brijesh Bajaj
$~30 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CM(M) 71/2018 and CM 1903-1904/2018 KARAN RANA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Amit Chauhan and Mr. Bharat Garg, Advocates versus BRIJESH BAJAJ ..... Respondent Through: None
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
O R D E R
% 17.01.2018 The right of the petitioner, impleaded as first defendant (now the sole defendant) to file written statement in the suit (CS 693/17) was closed by the Senior Civil Judge by the impugned order dated 01.11.2017 dismissing his application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act on the ground the written statement had been tendered beyond the period of 90 days, the plea in the said application that the written statement had been tendered after 36 days being incorrect. Clearly, there is some confusion prevailing on the mind of the learned Senior Civil Judge. From the documents filed, it appears the suit was instituted on 04.07.2017 and was taken up for the first time on 05.07.2017.
The summons were issued to the petitioner on 13.07.2017 and it was to be returned on 06.09.2017. The copy of the report (pages 51-52) on the summons would show that it was not CM(M) 71/2018
served as the petitioner was found having shifted from the given address. Be that as it may, it is the contention of the petitioner that he had learnt about the civil suit from Om Dutt Sharma, who had been impleaded as second defendant but whose name was struck off by order dated 12.10.2017 upon the plaintiff of the case conceding that he had already vacated the premises on 24.12.2016 and thereafter having nothing to do with the property in question. It is clear from the documents that the written statement was sought to be brought on record on 12.10.2017.
It is stated at bar that there is nothing on record of the trial court to show that more than 90 days had lapsed after service, the sole summons issued having been returned unserved. In view of the above, the counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be allowed to withdraw the present petition and instead approach the trial court with a review application setting out all the above facts.
The captioned petition and the applications filed therewith are dismissed as withdrawn.
Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master. R.K.GAUBA, J JANUARY 17, 2018 Yg CM(M) 71/2018