Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005316
$~52
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 01.12.2022
+ CM(M) 1342/2022 & CM APPL. 52052/2022
M/S VALTROM TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.
..... Petitioners
versus
M/S JPM INDUSTRIES LIMITED ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners : Mr. Bhavneet Arora and Mr. Rajesh Jha,
Advocates.
For the Respondent : None
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
JUDGMENT
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J. (ORAL)
1. By way of the present petition, the petitioners, who are defendants before the Trial Court challenges the order dated 02.08.2022 whereby, the right of the petitioners to file written statement was forfeited.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that as per the order dated 02.04.2022, it has been observed that the notice was served upon petitioners on 25.02.2022, however, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners on that date had made a specific submission that certain pages of the documents forming part of the plaint were not legible and for that reason the petitioners were unable to file the written statement.
3. Learned counsel submits that subsequently, despite requesting the counsel for the respondent, the said deficiency in the copies of the documents furnished to the petitioners were not made good. Learned
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VINOD KUMAR Signing Date:05.12.2022 CM(M) 1342/2022 1 16:40:32 Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005316
counsel submits that number of telephonic calls were made but got no response at all.
4. Learned counsel submits that all these facts were not taken into consideration by the learned Trial Court while passing order dated 02.08.2022.
5. From a perusal of the record, it appears that counsel for the petitioners, who had appeared on 02.04.2022 had in fact mentioned this fact, however, on that date, the Presiding Officer of the Court was transferred and that noting was made by the Court Officer.
6. Though, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the counsel for the petitioners had made numerous attempts to obtain the copies of the illegible documents from the counsel for the respondent telephonically and otherwise, it is clear that no notice to the counsel for the respondent or even an application to the learned Trial Court was ever made by the petitioners till date of the impugned order.
7. The present petition arises out of a suit falling within the Commercial Courts Act, and therefore, the prescription and the timelines provided therein are to be construed strictly.
8. That apart, the petitioners have utterly failed to place on record even one written document, in support of his contention that it was a bona fide attempt in the right earnest to obtain the copies of the illegible documents from the counsel for the respondent.
9. Having kept quiet and not taking steps in accordance with law, the petitioner cannot be heard to claim that injustice has been meted out to it.
10. In view of the above, this Court does not deem it fit nor does it find any infraction of law so far as the exercise of jurisdiction vested in the
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VINOD KUMAR Signing Date:05.12.2022 CM(M) 1342/2022 2 16:40:32 Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005316
learned Trial Court is concerned and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court is not inclined to interfere with it.
11. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. All pending applications are dismissed in accordance with law.
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J
DECEMBER 01, 2022/nd
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VINOD KUMAR Signing Date:05.12.2022 CM(M) 1342/2022 3 16:40:32
