27 December 2021, Monday

2 years ago

Allowing an application to condone the delay in filing a set-aside application cannot be interfered with under Article 227 despite doubt if the original filing was non-est: Delhi High Court

10 December 2021 | Ashok Kumar Puri v. S Suncon Realtors (P) Ltd., 2021 SCC OnLine Del 5220 | CM (M) 610 of 2021 | Amit Bansal J | Delhi High Court | 2021 SCC OnLine Del 5220

A set-aside petition was filed beyond three months but within the 30 days discretionary period. The Commercial Court allowed the application for condonation of delay and imposed Rs. 5,000/- costs.

Even though the High Court felt there “may be some merit in the contentions” that the original filing itself was non-est because it lacked several important documents and formalities, it was not a case of exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution. The court said that the order was not passed without inherent jurisdiction.

Also, since Section 8 CCA bars revision (under Section 115 CPC) against interlocutory orders in commercial matters, the scope of interference under Article 227 is also narrow.

Read the decision here.


connect with us: