‘Litigant sleeping over rights for years, can’t invoke Article 227’: Punjab and Haryana HC slams man over delay in filing plea

In this case there was a delay of two years in filing the written statement in a civil dispute and a four-year delay in challenging the trial court’s order before the high court.

Case

In 2019, the plaintiff before the trial court instituted a civil suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell. The petitioner sought time for filing a written statement.

Specific performance of an agreement to sell is a legal remedy where the court directs a party to fulfill their contractual obligations under an agreement to sell.

The trial court, after granting several opportunities, found that the petitioner “persistently failed” to file the written statement for nearly two years and consequently, struck off defence.

The petitioner moved the high court almost 3.9 years after the trial court’s order. The petitioner didn’t seek condonation of delay nor furnished any explanation for the delay.

Arguments, ruling

The petitioner’s counsel, Mukesh Yadav, submitted that the trial court’s order is illegal and that it has deprived the petitioner of his right to defend.

The order noted that the conduct of the petitioner was an attempt to delay the proceedings.

The high court rejected the argument of the petitioner that no prejudice would be caused if an opportunity is given to file the written statement.

The court remarked that the petitioner demonstrated utter disregard for procedural discipline and dismissed the petition.

“The petition is liable to be dismissed on the grounds of gross delay, laches, and lack of bona fides made out for interference with the well petitioner has demonstrated utter disregard for procedural discipline, and no indulgence is warranted,” the court held.