NDPS | Mentioning FIR Number On Memos Before Registration Makes the Entire Recovery Suspect: Himachal Pradesh High Court MACT | Once Deceased Is Proven To Be Skilled Worker, Deputy Commissioner's Wage Notification Is Applicable: P&H HC Bank’s Technical Excuses Can’t Override Employee’s Right to Ex Gratia Under Old Circulars: Bombay High Court Slams Canara Bank’s Rejection of Claim Once Worker Files Affidavit of Unemployment, Burden Shifts to Employer to Prove Gainful Employment: Delhi High Court Grants 17B Relief Despite 12-Year Delay Specific Relief Act | Readiness and Willingness Must Be Real and Continuous — Plaintiffs Cannot Withhold Funds and Blame the Seller: Bombay High Court Even If Claim Is Styled Under Section 163A, It Can Be Treated Under Section 166 If Negligence Is Pleaded And Higher Compensation Is Claimed: Supreme Court When Cheating Flows from One Criminal Conspiracy, the Law Does Not Demand 1852 FIRs: Supreme Court Upholds Single FIR in Multi-Crore Cheating Case Initiating Multiple FIRs on Same Facts is Impermissible: Supreme Court Quashes Parallel FIRs and Grants Bail Protection in Refund Case Limitation Act | Quasi-Judicial Bodies Cannot Invoke Section 5 Principles Without Express Statutory Grant: Supreme Court Arbitration Act | Commencement of Proceedings Triggered by Notice Receipt, Not Section 11 Filing: Supreme Court Strong and Cogent Evidence Must Exist at the Threshold to Deny Bail Under Section 319 CrPC: Supreme Court Appellate Court Under Section 37 Cannot Sit in Appeal Over Arbitral Award on Merits: Supreme Court Affidavit Ratifying Power of Attorney Cannot Be Disowned Later: Supreme Court Orders Specific Performance Despite Earlier Revocation Claims No Law Empowers a Corporation to Haunt a Retiree: Supreme Court Quashes Post-Retirement Disciplinary Action for Want of Jurisdiction Mere Expectation of Higher Bids Can't Justify Cancelling a Valid Auction: Supreme Court Quashes GDA’s Arbitrary Rejection of Highest Bidder Prolonged Incarceration Without Trial Violates Article 21, Even in Grave Economic Offences: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Arvind Dham in ₹673 Crore PMLA Case Article 14 | ‘Rules of the Game Cannot Be Changed Midstream’: Supreme Court Quashes Punjab’s Modified Sports Quota Policy for MBBS Admissions Rules of the Game Cannot Be Changed Midway: Supreme Court Quashes Bihar’s Retrospective Recruitment Amendment "Imaginary Ghost" - Court Permits Karthigai Deepam at Thiruparankundram ‘Deepathoon’: Madras High Court 353 IPC | Continuing Prosecution Against Citizens Despite Statutory Findings of Police Atrocities Is Abuse of Process: Kerala High Court Court Cannot Compel Plaintiff to Continue Suit Where No Liberty to File Fresh Suit is Sought: Bombay High Court Claim for Demurrage is Not a Crystallized Debt—Only an Unadjudicated Right to Sue: Andhra Pradesh High Court Declared Foreign Nationals Have No Right to Reside in India: Gauhati High Court Upholds Expulsion of Bangladeshi Woman Without Requiring Deportation Protocols At the Stage of Framing Charge, Presumption Suffices; Suicide Note and Grave Suspicion Enough: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Charge Under Section 306 IPC 173 CrPC | Framing of Charge Marks End of Investigation—Complainant Cannot Reopen Probe Merely by Citing Police Lapses: Bombay High Court “Possession Follows Title” Not An Absolute Rule When Ownership Is Disputed: Andhra Pradesh High Court ORDER 30 CPC | Appeal Filed by Firm Does Not Abate on Death of Partners: Calcutta High Court Bank Cannot Freeze Customer’s Account Based on Third-Party Dispute: Calcutta High Court Slams Axis Bank

Extension beyond 90 days should be exceptional: Last Opportunity for Written Statement Filing: P&H HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Namit Kumar, has granted a final opportunity to the petitioners in CR No.7117 of 2023, Gurvail Singh and another vs Gurwinder Singh and others, to file their written statement. This ruling comes as a relief to the petitioners whose defense was previously struck off due to the non-filing of a written statement within the prescribed 90-day period.

The Court's decision, delivered on November 28, 2023, has been pivotal in interpreting the procedural mandates of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), specifically Order 8, Rule 1. Justice Kumar, in his observation, emphasized the balance between procedural law and the dispensation of justice, stating, “The provisions of Order 8, Rule 1 of CPC, though directory, should ordinarily be adhered to.” This highlights the Court’s stance on maintaining the integrity of legal procedures while ensuring fairness.

The judgment has been a topic of much discussion among legal circles for its nuanced approach towards procedural defaults. The Court noted, “Extension beyond 90 days should be exceptional and for reasons recorded in writing.” This statement underlines the need for strict adherence to timelines in legal proceedings, while also acknowledging the possibility of exceptions in extraordinary circumstances.

The petitioners were represented by Mr. Kanwar Pahul Singh, Advocate, who argued that the delay in filing the written statement was neither intentional nor deliberate. Acknowledging this, the Court has allowed the petitioners a final chance to submit their statement, subject to a cost penalty, thereby preventing what could have been a significant procedural injustice.

This ruling is seen as a reinforcement of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in various precedents, where the procedural laws are considered directory but necessitate compliance to ensure swift and efficient judicial processes.

Date of Decision: 28th November 2023

GURVAIL SINGH AND ANOTHER VS GURWINDER SINGH AND OTHERS

Latest Legal News