Delhi HC Holds Delay Beyond 120 Days in Filing Written Statement Cannot Be Condoned; Dismisses Chamber Appeal [Read Order]

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has dismissed a chamber appeal filed under Rule 5, Chapter II of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018, challenging an order refusing to condone delay in filing a written statement. The Court held that it has no power to extend time beyond the prescribed outer limit of 120 days.

The order was passed by Justice Mini Pushkarna on April 13, 2026, in a matter arising out of CS(OS) 56/2025.

The appeal was filed against the order dated November 20, 2025, passed by the Joint Registrar (Judicial), whereby the delay in filing the written statement by Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 was not condoned. The Joint Registrar recorded that the defendants were served with summons via email on March 20, 2025, and through ordinary mode on March 26, 2025. The written statement was filed on July 24, 2025, after the expiry of the extended period of 120 days and was therefore not taken on record.

The Court noted that under Chapter VII, Rule 2 of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018, the period for filing a written statement is to be computed from the date of service of summons. Further, Rule 4 provides that the written statement must be filed within 30 days, extendable by a further period not exceeding 90 days upon showing sufficient cause, “but not thereafter.”

The Court held that the phrase “but not thereafter” clearly indicates that it does not have the power to condone delay beyond the stipulated period of 120 days. It observed that such language fixes an outer boundary for filing and excludes any further extension.

Relying on P. Radha Bai and Others v. P. Ashok Kumar and Another (2019) 13 SCC 445, the Court noted that the phrase “but not thereafter” reflects legislative intent to impose a strict outer limit and is mandatory in nature. The Court also referred to the Division Bench judgment in Manhar Sabharwal v. High Court of Delhi and Others, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 5945, which interpreted similar language to mean that courts cannot condone delay beyond the prescribed extended period.

The Court further noted that where a statute prescribes a specific limitation period along with a fixed condonable period, the power to condone delay is restricted to that extent and cannot be exercised thereafter.

Applying these principles, the Court held that since the written statement in the present case was filed beyond the extended period of 120 days from the date of service of summons, the delay could not be condoned.

Accordingly, the Court found no error in the order of the Joint Registrar (Judicial) and dismissed the appeal. The pending application was also dismissed.

The matter in CS(OS) 56/2025 has been directed to be listed before the Joint Registrar (Judicial) on July 31, 2026.

Case Details

• Case Title: Shiva Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. Aggcon Equipments International Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
• Case Number: CS(OS) 56/2025; O.A. 86/2026; I.A. 9988/2026
• Court: Delhi High Court
• Bench: Justice Mini Pushkarna
• Date of Decision: April 13, 2026
• Next Listing: July 31, 2026 before Joint Registrar (Judicial)
• Counsel for Plaintiffs: Mr. Ramesh Kumar, Adv.
• Counsel for Defendants: Mr. Santosh Kumar Chaurihaa, Adv.

[Read Order]