Smt. Gurjeet Kaur vs Sardar Harinder Pal Singh And Ors

$~45
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Date of Decision: 31.08.2026
# CNR No.DLHC010445152025
CS(OS) 450/2025
+
SMT. GURJEET KAUR .....Plaintiff
Through: Ms. Jasmeet Kaur and Mr. Pushpreet
Singh, Advocates along with Plaintiff
in person.
versus

SARDAR HARINDER PAL SINGH AND ORS .....Defendants
Through: Ms. Anupama Singh, Mr. Amit K.
Rana, Mr. Mohit Kumar, Advocates
for D-2.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

SACHIN DATTA, J. (Oral)

IA No.23698/2026 (filed on behalf of D-2 seeking condonation of delay of
93 days in filing the appeal)
IA No.23699/2026 (seeking condonation of delay of 04 days in refiling the
appeal)
O.A. 240/2026 (Appeal under Rule 5, Chapter II of Delhi High Court
Original Side Rules, 2018, filed on behalf of D-2 seeking setting aside of
order dated 01.04.2026)
1. The present appeal has been filed by the defendant no.2 assailing the
order dated 01.04.2026 passed by the learned Joint Registrar (Judicial) in the
present proceedings. The said order reads as under:
“Mediation stand failed between the parties.
Signature Not Verified
CS(OS) 450/2025 Page 1 of 6

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:03.09.2026
18:14:06

On the oral request made by Ld. Counsel for plaintiff and also not objected
to by Ld. Counsel for defendants no. 1 and 3, the Repliction filed on behalf
of the plaintiff to the Written Statement of defendant no.1 alongwith
affidavit of admission/denial is taken on record irrespective of any other
objection.
At this stage, it is submitted by Ld. Counsel for defendant no.1 and 3 that
he adopts the Written Statement on behalf of defendant no.3 as filed on
behalf of defendant no.1. In view thereof, the Written Statement earlier
filed on behalf of defendant no.1 shall also be read on behalf of defendant
no.3 also.
Defendant no.2 and 4 have been served earlier as reflected in the order
dated 08.10.2025 and they had been directed to file their respective
Written Statement if any, however, no Written Statement has been filed nor
any advance copy has been supplied to plaintiff.
The time to file Written Statement on behalf of defendants no.2 and 4 is
lapsed. In these circumstances, right of defendants no.2 and 4 to file
Written Statement is closed. The defendants no.2 and 4 are also
proceeded against ex-parte.
Matter be placed before Hon’ble Court for further directions on
20.05.2026, date already fixed. In the meanwhile, pleadings be completed
by the parties.”
2. In the present appeal, the appellant/ defendant no.2, has averred as

under:
“3. That the Applicant was duly served with the summons in the present
suit on an earlier date, however, owing to her physical absence from India
and further her state of profound bereavement and grief following her
mother’s death, she could not coordinate and appoint a proper legal
counsel at Delhi, India, to file her Written Statement or seek an exemption
from personal appearance on the concerned dates before the Hon’ble
Court.
4. That upon becoming aware of the ex parte order dated 01.04.2026, the
Applicant acted with promptness and due diligence. She immediately
approached the undersigned advocates, who were retained on 06.05.2026,
and instructions were given forthwith to file the present application. The
Applicant has at all material times acted bona fide and without any intent
to delay the proceedings before this Hon'ble Court.
5. That the Applicant has now, after her grief of losing her mother
Signature Not Verified
CS(OS) 450/2025 Page 2 of 6

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:03.09.2026
18:14:06

subsided, instructed her counsel to take immediate steps to join the
proceedings and contest the suit on merits. She is ready and willing to file
her Written Statement and participate in further proceedings.
6. That the Applicant has a bona fide defence to the suit on merits. She is a
legal heir of her late parents and is entitled to an equal and undivided
share in the suit property along with the other legal heirs. The Plaintiff
has no exclusive or preferential claim over the said property. The
Applicant disputes any such claim and is ready and willing to file her
Written Statement setting out her defence in full. Therefore, if the ex-parte
proceedings against the Applicant are not set aside, she will suffer grave
and irreparable loss and prejudice, while no prejudice will be caused to
the Plaintiff, who may be adequately compensated by costs, if this Hon'ble
Court deems fit.
7. That the failure of the Applicant to appear was neither willful nor
deliberate, but arose from the aforesaid circumstances. The Applicant has
approached this Hon’ble Court at the earliest possible opportunity after
becoming aware of the exact stage of proceedings (i.e., the closure of her
right to file Written Statement and being set down ex-parte as per order
dated 01.04.2026).
8. That in the interest of justice, a liberal approach may be taken, as
procedural rules are handmaids of justice and not obstacles. The
Applicant undertakes to file her Written Statement within such time as this
Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant and to abide by any terms as to
costs that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to impose.”

3. The principal justification furnished by the appellant for her failure to
file the Written Statement is that she was out of India and was undergoing a
period of bereavement following the demise of her mother. It is further
stated that she became aware of the order dated 01.04.2026 only thereafter
and engaged counsel on 06.05.2026.
4. However, these circumstances, do not afford acceptable justification

for the appellant’s failure to take steps in the proceedings despite having
been duly served with the summons long back. The due service on the
appellant has been taken note of in the order dated 08.10.2025.
5. In the circumstances, the Joint Registrar (Judicial) was justified in
Signature Not Verified
CS(OS) 450/2025 Page 3 of 6

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:03.09.2026
18:14:06

foreclosing the right of the defendant nos. 2 and 4 to file the written
statement vide its order dated 01.04.2026. The same is in consonance with
judgment of this Court in Delhi Gymkhana Club Limited v. Col Ashish
Khanna SM Retd. & Ors ., 2024 SCC OnLine Del 7022 , wherein a Division
Bench of this Court has observed as follows:
“ 19. Rule 4 of Chapter VII of DHC Original Side Rules being mandatory
in nature the 120 days limitation period stipulated under the said Rule
th
would begin from 25 March, 2022 i.e., the date when summons was
issued and duly accepted on behalf of the Appellant Club
.
20. It is noted that on the date on which the new management is stated to
have appeared for the first time before the Court in the concerned
suit i.e., 31
st
May, 2022, the outer period of limitation of 120 days had not
been exhausted. Thus, the Appellant Club could have still filed the written
statement at that stage, but it chose not to do so, albeit on the ground that
the representation of the Respondent/Plaintiff to the new management was
under consideration in terms of the direction passed by the ld.
st
Single vide order dated 31
May, 2022 in the concerned suit. However, as
is clear from the said order of the ld. Single Judge, there is no direction
regarding exclusion of the time taken for consideration of the said
representation from the stipulated time for filing of written statement.
21.
The purpose of fixing an outer time limit under Rule 4 of Chapter VII
of the DHC Original Side Rules for filing the written statement is to ensure
that the delay in filing of written statement does not lead to further delay in
adjudication of civil suits. The validity of this Rule having been upheld by
the Division Bench in Manhar Sabharwal (supra), the said Rule becomes
mandatorily applicable to all suits including non-commercial suits before
the Delhi High Court (Original Side). Accordingly, the Court can only
extend the period of 30 days for filing of written statement by further 90
days, but not beyond the period of 120 days in total in the opinion of this
Court. The language of Rule 4, Chapter VII of the Delhi High Court
(Original Side) is clear when it uses the term ‘not thereafter’ , as is seen
from the text extracted above.
6. Further, a recent judgment rendered by a coordinate Bench of this

”
Court in Shiva Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. Aggcon Equipments
International Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. , 2026 SCC OnLine Del 1586, after
considering various decisions passed by this Court with respect to the time
Signature Not Verified
CS(OS) 450/2025 Page 4 of 6

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:03.09.2026
18:14:06

period for filing the written statement, has observed as under:
“ 5. Further, Rule 4 of Chapter VII of the Delhi High Court (Original Side)
Rules, 2018, clearly stipulates that the written statement has to be filed
within a period of 30 days of receipt of the summons and the Court on
being shown sufficient cause, can extend the time for filing the written
statement for a further period not exceeding 90 days, but not thereafter.
Rule 4 of Chapter VII of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018,
reads as under:
“xxx xxx xxx
4. Extension of time for filing written statement:- If the
Court is satisfied that the defendant was prevented by
sufficient cause for exceptional and unavoidable reasons in
filing the written statement within 30 days, it may extend the
time for filing the same by a further period not exceeding 90
days, but not thereafter.
For such extension of time, the party
in delay shall be burdened with costs as deemed appropriate.
The written statement shall not be taken on record unless such
costs have been paid/deposited. In case the defendant fails to
file the affidavit of admission/denial of documents filed by the
plaintiff, the documents filed by the plaintiff shall be deemed to
be admitted. In case, no written statement is filed within the
extended time also, the Registrar may pass orders for closing
the right to file the written statement.
xxx xxx xxx”
(Emphasis Supplied)
*
7. The usage of the words “but not thereafter” in Rule 4 of Chapter VII of
the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018 clearly shows that this
Court does not have any power to condone the delay in filing the written
statement beyond the stipulated period of 120 days.
*
11. Accordingly, it is clear that Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules,
2018 are categorical to the extent of counting the period of filing of the
written statement from the date of service of the summons.
12. Therefore, since, in the present case admittedly the written statement
has been filed beyond the extended period of 120 days and the condonable
period for filing written statement is already over, this Court cannot
condone any delay beyond the extended condonable period.”
7. In view of the above, no merit is found in the present appeal.
Signature Not Verified
CS(OS) 450/2025 Page 5 of 6

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:03.09.2026
18:14:06

8. Although this Court has taken note of the relevant circumstances and
the legal position as set out hereinabove, no case is made out for
condonation of delay in filing the present appeal.
9. In the circumstances, IA No.23698/2026 (seeking condonation of
delay of 93 days in filing the appeal), and IA No.23699/2026 (seeking
condonation of delay of 04 days in re-filing the appeal), stand dismissed.
O.A No. 240/2026 also stands dismissed, both on limitation as well as on
merits.
CS(OS) 450/2025
10. The defendant no.1 is directed to comply with the directions
contained in the order dated 29.07.2026 passed in the present proceedings,
failing which, this Court shall be constrained to take appropriate coercive
measures to ensure implementation of the said order.
11. List before the Joint Registrar (Judicial) on 23.09.2026 i.e., the date
already, fixed for further proceedings.

SACHIN DATTA, J
AUGUST 31, 2026/ r, ka

Signature Not Verified
CS(OS) 450/2025 Page 6 of 6

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:03.09.2026
18:14:06