Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Delhi · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18819 (DEL)

ROHTASH KATARIA v. ZAHID AND ORS

CM(M)/2062/2026 · 2026-09-18

Ajay Digpaul

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

$~65 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010444912026 + CM(M) 2062/2026 & CM APPL. 64041/2026 ROHTASH KATARIA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Girik Tolani, Advocate. versus ZAHID AND ORS .....Respondents Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL O R D E R % 18.09.2026 1. Through the present petition, the petitioner is assailing the order dated 29.05.2026 passed by the learned District Judge-02, South District, Saket Courts, New Delhi, in CS DJ titled ‘Rohtash Kataria v. Zahid & Ors.’, whereby respondents’ application, filed under Order VIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking condonation of 78 days’ delay in filing the written statement, was allowed, subject to payment of Rs. 3,000/- by each respondent to the petitioner. 2. After hearing submissions of both parties, the learned Trial Court vide impugned order dated 29.05.2026, allowed the respondents’ application seeking condonation of delay, and took their written statement on record. The relevant portion of the said order, reads thus: “6. Since it was submitted that multiple litigation were going on between the parties and voluminous revenue records were required to be collected. Further, on account of marriage in the family of Counsel for defendant, This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/09/2026 at 11:01:42 delay occurred in filing the written statement, this Court deems it fit to take a lenient view, and allow the application seeking condonation of delay in filing the written statement by defendant no 1 to 5 subject to the payment of cost of Rs 3,000/- each paid by defendant no 1 to 5 to plaintiff. Accordingly, written statements filed by the defendant no 1 to 5 be taken on record.” 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the learned Trial Court erred in condonation the respondents’ delay in filing the written statement, subject only to payment of a marginal cost of Rs. 3,000/-. 4. Learned counsel further submits that no sufficient cause for delay was made out in the respondents’ application, and that their stated reason for delay, being collection and perusal of voluminous revenue records owing to multiple pending litigations between the parties, fails to justify condonation of a delay exceeding not merely 78 days, but rather, more than 100 days. 5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the learned Trial Court was justified in holding that the delay of 78 days, as claimed by the respondents, stood explained on account of multiplicity of proceedings between the parties and the consequent requirement of going through voluminous revenue records by the respondents. 6. This Court is further of the opinion, when the written statement, accompanied by a condonation of delay application, is filed within the statutory outer limit of 120 days, it remains within the discretion of the trial courts to condone such delay, after having regard to the conduct of the parties concerned and the explanation furnished by the party in default. The learned Trial Court, is equally vested with this discretion, and with the discretion to impose costs on the defaulting party, upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/09/2026 at 11:01:42 7. In view of the aforesaid, this Court finds no reason to intervene in the impugned order dated 29.05.2026, by way of using its supervisory jurisdiction as prescribed under Article 227 of the Indian Constitution. 8. The present petition, along with pending applications, if any, stands dismissed. AJAY DIGPAUL, J SEPTEMBER 18, 2026 Sk/os This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/09/2026 at 11:01:42