Source: Delhi High Court  

Why in News? 

Recently, the bench of Justice Manoj Jain   held that the 120-day limit for filing a written statement under the CPC does not apply to replies to amended plaints. 

• The Delhi High Court held this in the matter of M/S A. G. Overseas Pvt Ltd & Ors. v. Chetan Dass (2025). 

What was the Background of M/S A. G. Overseas Pvt Ltd & Ors. v. Chetan Dass (2025) Case? 

• M/s A.G. Overseas Pvt Ltd & Ors. (Defendants/Petitioners) were defending a commercial suit filed by Chetan Dass (Plaintiff/Respondent). 
• The Defendants were duly served with summons and appeared before the Trial Court. 
• Subsequently, on 29th April 2024, the Plaintiff moved an application under Order VI Rule 17 seeking amendment in the plaint. 
• The Trial Court allowed the amendment application and granted the Defendants an opportunity to file a written statement to the amended plaint, adjourning the matter to 12th July 2024. 
• On the adjourned date, the Trial Court noted that no written statement had been filed by the Defendants, consequently striking off their defence and closing their right to submit a written statement. 
• The Trial Court's decision was premised on the expiration of the period prescribed under the Commercial Courts Act for filing the written statement. 
• Aggrieved by this order, the Defendants filed the present petition challenging the Trial Court's decision to strike off their defence. 
• No offence was alleged in this civil commercial matter which concerned procedural compliance with the timelines for filing written statements under the Commercial Courts Act and the Code of Civil Procedure. 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The High Court observed that the stipulation in the proviso to Order VIII Rule 1 CPC is for calculating the period within which a written statement is to be filed, which must be reckoned from the date on which the defendant was served with the summons. 
• The Court held that once service is complete and the defendant appears before the court, if there is a subsequent amendment to the plaint, the court may provide a timeframe for filing a written statement to the amended plaint. 
• However, for the purposes of striking off defence, the Court cannot ipso facto rely on the provisions applicable to the original plaint. 
• The High Court noted that the summons issued to the Defendants were not in the proper form as these were "Summons for Settlement of Issues" rather than the summons prescribed for a commercial suit. 
• Crucially, the Court observed that the outer permissible limit of 120 days to file a written statement had not even expired when the Trial Court struck off the Defendants' defence on 12th July 2024. 
• The High Court remarked that the Defendants should have been more cautious and vigilant in ensuring timely filing of their written statement. 
• No offence was at issue in this matter as it pertained solely to civil procedure and the right to file a written statement in response to an amended plaint. 
• The Court ultimately allowed the petition, directing that the written statement be taken on record subject to payment of costs of Rs. 25,000/- by the Defendants. 

What is Order VII Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code,1908 (CPC)? 

• Rule 1 of Order VII deals with the particulars to be contained in a plaint. It states that - 
  • The plaint shall contain the following particulars: — 
    • (a) The name of the Court in which the suit is brought. 
    • (b) The name, description and place of residence of the plaintiff. 
    • (c) The name, description and place of residence of the defendant, so far as they can be ascertained. 
    • (d) Where the plaintiff or the defendant is a minor or a person of unsound mind, a statement to that effect. 
    • (e) The facts constituting the cause of action and when it arose. 
    • (f) The facts showing that the Court has jurisdiction. 
    • (g) The relief which the plaintiff claims. 
    • (h) Where the plaintiff has allowed a set-off or relinquished a portion of his claim, the amount so allowed, or relinquished. 
    • (i) A statement of the value of the subject matter of the suit for the purposes of jurisdiction and of court fees, so far as the case admits.