Written Statement to be taken on record and delay in filing the said statement to be condoned : Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court in the case of Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. Versus The State of Maharashtra ( Writ Petition NO. 6989 OF 2008) has declared that the written statement should have been taken into account and that the delay should have been allowed since the petitioner shouldn’t have been denied the chance to argue the merits of the claim. The proceedings were presided over by Honourable Justice Rajesh S Patil. 


The writ petition was filed by the original defendants to the case, where in the City Civil Court, Mumbai had refused to condone the delay of 31 months and 16 days from the part of the plaintiffs. The defendants had used the current Writ Petition to contest the impugned order. Without taking into account the precise legal position, the City Civil Court in Bombay had denied the application for a delay pardon.

Therefore, in the interest of justice, the contested order was requested by the petitioners to be revoked and annulled.

3 main cases had been referred to by the Advocates of the said petitioners. This being, 1) Kailash vs. Nanhku & Ors., reported in (2005), 2) Zolba vs. Keshao and Others reported in (2008) and 3) Raj Process Equipments Systems Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. vs. Honest Derivatives Pvt. Ltd. reported in Civil Appeal No. 8089 of 2022.

When the Court looked at the documents on file, it was clear that a written statement of fact had been affirmed within 30 days of the issuance of the summons. However, in the petitioner’s case, the written statement of fact could not have been presented in court because that is not how the City Civil Court in Bombay operates. Instead, documents are only presented across the bar once the case has been heard.


The Court held that the case was of civil nature and not commercial. Written statements were in fact confirmed on January 17, 2005, as evidenced by the photocopy of the confirmed written statements that is included in the document attached to the Writ Petition. Hence there was no other reason for the Petitioners to choose not to submit the written statement to the Registry.

It was held that the petitioner shouldn’t be denied the chance to evaluate the claim’s merits and  that the Written Statement ought to have been recorded and that the delay ought to have been granted.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”


Click here to view full pdf.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *