Courts cannot condone delay in filing written statement beyond 120 days in non-commercial suit: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court recently reiterated that a written statement in a non-commercial suit has to be filed within 120 days from the date of the summons being served. [Col Ashish Khanna SM Retd v. Delhi Gymkhana Club And Ors].The Court pointed out that Rule 4 of Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018 (DHC Rules) circumscribed the power of the Court to condone any delay beyond the maximum permissible time of 120 days.Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri made the observation while upholding a Joint Registrar’s decision to close Delhi Gymkhana Club’s right to file a written statement in a non-commercial suit.The judge noted that a Division Bench in Charu Agrawal v. Alok Kalia & Ors has “very emphatically held the inviolability of the hard stop period of 120 days prescribed in Rule 4 for filing the written statement.” “As of now, Charu (Supra) has laid to rest the debate on the ability of courts to condone delay in filing of written statement beyond 120 days in a non- commercial suit. Rule 4 circumscribes the power of court to condone the delay beyond the maximum permissible time of 120 days,” the judgment stated..The Court was dealing with a suit initiated by retired Colonel Ashish Khanna, the former Secretary of the Delhi Gymkhana Club. He had approached the Court in 2022 challenging his termination from the Club in August 2020. On March 25 last year, the Court issued summons to the Club. When the matter came to be listed before the Joint Registrar on May 4, 2022 for the completion of pleadings, the Club remained unrepresented. On May 31, 2022, counsel for the Club informed the Court that 15 persons had been nominated by the Central government to manage its affairs and that they had not yet taken charge..When the suit again came to be listed before the Joint Registrar on July 12, 2022, it was observed that no written statement had been filed by the Club.On September 1, 2022, an application filed on behalf of Colonel Khanna under Order VIII, Rules 1 and 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) was listed before the Joint Registrar, who held that the statutory time period of 120 days for filing written statement was already over. The Joint Registrar thus closed the right of the defendant to file a written statement..Justice Ohri noted that the interpretation of Order VIII, Rule 1 of the CPC vis-à-vis Rule 4 and 5 of the DHC Rules first came up before the Court in Gautam Gambhir & Ors v. Jai Ambey Traders & Ors and Ram Sarup Lugani & Anr. v. Nirmal Lugani & Ors.“The Court taking note of the fact that the DHC Rules came into effect in 2018 i.e., after the Commercial Courts Act was notified, opined that use of expression ‘but not thereafter’ in Rule 4 would mean that a total 120 days (30 + 90) was granted for filing written statement. Further, both Rules 4 and 5 were held to be mandatory,” he observed.Justice Ohri further noted that in Ram Sarup Lugani, a Division Bench considered the scope and object of Chapter VII of the DHC Rules and concluded that the use of ‘but not thereafter’ in Rule 5 indicated the intention to make the provision mandatory and not directory..Accordingly, the Court held that the decision of the Joint Registrar against the Club is in conformity with the law and the earlier decisions of the High Court.The Court, therefore, dismissed the Club's chamber appeal as well as its application to condone the delay in filing its written statement..Colonel Khanna was represented by Senior Advocate Aryama Sundaram and Advocates Sanyam Khetarpal, Nitesh Goyal, Zaffar and Prakriti Anand.Advocates Prateek Kumar, Raveena Rai and Apeksha Dhanvijay appeared for Delhi Gymkhana Club.Advocates Gaurav Liberhan, Angad Mehta and Arsh appeared for other defendants..[Read Judgment]