Raj Kumar Gupta And Another vs Chief Manager

Rajesh Bindal, J

The petitioners have approached this Court impugning the order dated 09.05.2019 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Leh, whereby written statement by the petitioners was not taken on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that suit for recovery was filed by the respondent/plaintiff. The petitioners having come to know about the same had put in appearance on 27.11.2018 and sought time to file the written statement. The claim made in the suit was for recovery of ₹ 3 crores. It was further submitted that the suit is still pending and no effective proceedings have taken place thereafter. The written statement could not be prepared within 30 days. However, on 31st day, application was filed under Order 8 Rule 1 CPC for extension of time to file written statement. The learned Court below without appreciating the arguments raised by the petitioners rejected the same. No doubt, the written statement is to be filed within 30 days. However, time could be extended up to 120 days, in terms of judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in M/s SCG Contracts India Private Limited v. K. S. Chamankar Infrastructure Private Limited and others, 2019 (2) R.C.R (Civil) 249. The maximum period provided is 120 days. Beyond that there could not be any extension of time. As the written statement was filed on 31st day, the same should have been taken on record and suit proceeded further. The object for which the amendments were carried out has not been achieved as the application filed by the petitioners for extension of time to file written statement itself remained pending for more than four months.

For the view I am taking, I do not deem it appropriate to issue notice to the respondent as the same will further delay the process and defeat the very purpose for which substantive amendments were made in CPC in the Jammu and Kashmir Commercial Courts Act, 2018.

The facts, as are evident from the record, are that the respondent filed a suit for recovery of ₹ 3 crores from the plaintiffs. After service of notice, the petitioners appeared through their counsel on 27.11.2018. In terms of the provisions of CPC as amended vide Schedule attached to the J&K Commercial Courts Act, the period prescribed for filing of written statement is 30 days. In case of failure he can be allowed further time for the reasons to be recorded in writing and on payment of such cost as the court deems fit. However, not beyond 120 days from the date of service of summons. It is admitted fact on record that the petitioners had put in appearance in court on 27.11.2018 and application for extension of time for filing written statement was filed on 27.12.2018, that is, 31st day but the learned court below rejected that application vide order dated 09.05.2019, that is, after 4 months and 13 days. Though it has been recorded in the order that the petitioners were represented before the court but the application itself remained pending for such a long period. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in M/s SCG Contracts India Private Limited's case (supra) had opined that provisions of Order 8 Rule 1 read with Order 8 Rule 10 CPC, as amended vide Schedule attached to J&K Commercial Courts Act, 2018 are mandatory in nature. However, the fact remains that the maximum period providing for filing of written statement, which can be extended by the court after 30 days, for the reasons to be recorded and subject to payment of cost, is 120 days. There cannot be any extension beyond that.

As in the case in hand, the application for extension of time along with written statement was filed on 31st day, the same should have been taken on record and the suit proceeded further. In fact by keeping the application itself pending for 4 months and 13 days, the very purpose for which amendments in CPC were carried out vide Schedule attached to the J&K Commercial Courts Act, has been defeated.

For the reasons mentioned above, present petition is allowed. The impugned order passed by the learned court below is set aside. The written statement already filed by the petitioners, along with application, is directed to be taken on record and the suit be proceeded further in accordance with law. The same shall be subject to payment of ₹ 10,000/- as cost by the petitioners to the respondent-Bank by way of Demand Draft. The cost has to be paid on or before the next date of hearing fixed by the court below.

In case the respondent has any grievance against the order passed by this Court, it shall have liberty to file application for recalling/modification thereof.