The Supreme Court has recently allowed an appeal, directing the written statements filed by the defendants after the extended period of limitation during record to be taken on record and proceed with the court/tribunal proceedings.
By the impugned judgment, the High Court had dismissed the said applications and consequently denied the applicants/defendants prayer to take on record their written statements.
According to the High Court, the applications cannot be allowed as the period of 30 days to file the written statements had expired on 08.03.2020. The High Court had also held that the order dated 23.03.2020 passed by the apex Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020 [In Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation], which is to be effective from 15.03.2020 would not enure to the benefit of the applicants/defendants since the limitation period for filing the written statements had expired on 08.03.2020.
It was remarked by the Calcutta High Court that, “since the orders of this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India extended only “the period of limitation” and not the period up to which delay can be condoned, the applications for taking on record the written statements cannot be entertained.”
Sanjoy Ghose, Senior Counsel appeared for the appellants/defendants and Sahil Tagotra, Counsel appeared for the respondent/plaintiff.
Counsel for the appellants, by placing reliance on the judgment of this Court in Prakash Corporates vs. Dee Vee Projects Limited, (2022), submitted that much water has flown after the judgment of Sagufa Ahmed.
According to the Senior Counsel, Prakash Corporates, while noticing the orders of 23.03.2020, 06.05.2020 and 10.07.2020 also deals with the directions in the orders of 08.03.2021, 27.04.2021 and 23.09.2021 made in the same In re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation.
Noticing these subsequent orders, according to the learned Senior Counsel, the apex Court had, in paras 28.1, 28.2 and 33.4 of Prakash Corporates has, for the reasons set out therein, distinguished Sagufa Ahmed’s case.
Sahil Tagotra, learned Counsel for the plaintiff reiterated the findings of the High Court and submitted that the applicants have forfeited their right to file the written statements.
The Apex Court bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and K.V. Viswanathan observed that, “When the whole world was in the grip of devastating pandemic, it could never have been said that the parties were sleeping over their rights. It is, at this juncture, that this Court stepped in and after taking suo motu cognizance passed orders under Article 142 of the Constitution of India extending the deadlines. The extraordinary situation was dealt with rightly by extraordinary orders protecting the rights of parties by ensuring that their remedies and defenses were not barred.”
The Apex Court thus allowed the written statement filed belatedly by the appellants/defendants to be taken on record.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
