CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(1999) 09 DEL CK 0141

R.S. Chimni (Maj.) (Retd.) vs Mr. Jagmohan Dilwari

Delhi High Court · Decided on 20 September 1999 · Citation: (2000) 1 AD 99 : (1999) 82 DLT 646 : (2000) 124 PLR 28

HON’BLE JUDGES
J.B. Goel, J
CASE NUMBER
Suit No. 1355 of 1995

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 339 words

IA. No. 3502/98.

1.

By this application Defendant No.3 seeks the condensation of delay in filing the written statement. Defendant No.3 was served for 28.9.1995. Thereafter, several opportunities were given to the defendant No.3 to file the written statement but that was not filed till 21.10.1997. On that day final opportunity to file the written statement within four weeks was given. By the same order it was also directed that if the written statement is not filed within that period the right to file the written statement in the present proceedings shall be closed. Since, the right to file the written statement stand closed by the order dated October 21,1997 after the expiry of four weeks, the question of condensation of delay does not arise. This application is not maintainable and is dismissed.

I.A. No. 2894/98 (Order 9 Rule. 7 CPC by D-1)

2.

Defendant No.1 was served by publication in "Statesman" newspaper. As no one had appeared on behalf of defendant No.1 he was proceeded ex-parte on 21.10.97. This application under Order 9 Rule 7 CPC has been filed only 28.3.1990. This application has been filed by defendant No.1 through his Attorney and the same is neither signed by defendant No.1 nor is supported by his affidavit.

3.

Defendant No.1 was directed to file Power of attorney which has not been produced on behalf of defendant No.1 as directed on 8.4.99. Learned counsel for defendant No.1 states that defendant No.1 has fallen sick and is unable to come. No application or Medical Certificate to this effect has been brought. The power of attorney could have been still produced through Counsel. In the facts and circumstances, I am satisfied that defendant No.1 is intentionally delaying the disposal of the suit. This application is dismissed.

4.

I.A. Stands disposed of.

I.A. No. 3593/99

5.

Dismissed.

Suit No. 1355/95

6.

Since defendants have been proceeded ex-parte plaintiff is allowed to lead evidence by way of affidavit. Affidavit evidence be filed within eight weeks. To appear before the Joint Registrar on 17.1.2000.