2022 (5) TMI 1569 - SC - Indian Laws

Refusal to condone the delay in filing the written statement - computation of time limitation - HELD THAT - In that view of the matter, the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall have to be excluded for the purposes of limitation as may be prescribed under any General or SPECIAL LAWS in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings. The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 being a Special Law, the said order shall also be applicable with respect to the limitation prescribed under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 also. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above and more particularly when the 120 days period expired in the present case on 09.05.2020 which was during the aforesaid period as prescribed by this Court in the aforesaid order, the High Court ought to have excluded the aforesaid period for the purpose of filing the written statement and ought to have permitted to take the written statement on record. The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court refusing to condone the delay and take on record the written statement is hereby quashed and set aside. The Appeal is accordingly allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Refusal to condone delay in filing written statement.
2. Exclusion of period for limitation purposes.
3. Quashing of High Court's order.
4. Direction to Trial Court for interim injunction application.

Analysis:
1. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal against the High Court's judgment, where the defendants were aggrieved by the refusal to take their written statement on record and the denial to condone the delay in filing it. The High Court had cited the expiration of the 120-day period during the lockdown as the reason for not condoning the delay, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition.

2. The Supreme Court referred to its earlier orders and directed the exclusion of the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 for limitation purposes in all judicial proceedings. This exclusion was also applicable to special laws like the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. As the 120-day period expired during the excluded timeframe, the Court held that the High Court should have excluded this period for filing the written statement.

3. Consequently, the Supreme Court quashed and set aside the High Court's order, directing the written statement to be taken on record and considered according to the law. The Court emphasized that the High Court should have permitted the filing of the written statement considering the excluded period for limitation purposes.

4. Additionally, the Supreme Court noted the pendency of an interim injunction application before the Trial Court and directed the Trial Court to promptly decide on it, preferably within six weeks from the date of the Supreme Court's order. The appeal was allowed in favor of the defendants without any costs, based on the above considerations.