Premium
This is an archive article published on August 26, 2024

Delhi HC observes 120-day limit on filing written submissions neither unconstitutional nor discriminatory

A bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna held that provisions of the CPC itself and the Delhi High Court Act confer authority on the high court to frame its rules of practice and procedure

delhiA bunch of petitions had challenged Rule 4, Chapter VII of the Delhi High Court Original Side Rules as unconstitutional. (File photo)

The Delhi High Court Friday dismissed multiple petitions that challenged the constitutionality of a provision of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018, which mandates a strict timeline of 120 days for filing written statements in non-commercial matters.

A bunch of petitions had challenged Rule 4, Chapter VII of the Delhi High Court Original Side Rules as unconstitutional. It was argued that it creates “an unfair discrimination and unequal treatment amongst various litigants in the territory of Delhi, merely on the basis of pecuniary jurisdiction,” as non-commercial matters in district courts are governed by the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) that allow the court to condone the delay in filing written statements in non-commercial matters beyond 120 days.

A bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna held that provisions of the CPC itself and the Delhi High Court Act confer authority on the high court to frame its rules of practice and procedure on the original civil procedure and that it further “envisions difference in the Rules of practice and procedure between a High Court, and a Civil Court.”

The HC also reiterated that provisions of the Rules “will have an overriding effect on other provisions of the CPC” and in case of “any conflict, the DHC Original Side Rules shall prevail.”

Further noting that Rule 4 emanates from the powers granted under Section 129 of the CPC and Section 7 of the Delhi High Court Act, the bench observed that the petitioners did not challenge either of these provisions, thus failing to establish their case.

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Loading Taboola...
Advertisement