Summary
The Supreme Court directed acceptance of written statements in a commercial suit because the pandemic exclusion orders covered the outer period for condoning filing delay. Although the initial thirty days expired before 15 March 2020, the 120-day outer limit fell within the excluded period. Later orders expanded the protection considered in Sagufa Ahmed and benefited the defendants despite postdating the High Court decision. The appeals were allowed.
Issues
- Whether the pandemic exclusion applied when the initial thirty days had expired but the 120-day outer limit had not.
- Whether subsequent exclusion orders displaced the basis on which the High Court relied on Sagufa Ahmed.
Provisions considered
- Order VIII Rule 1, as amended for commercial disputes, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908The ordinary thirty-day period and 120-day outer limit were considered subject to the extraordinary pandemic exclusion orders. After exclusion, the applications and written statements dated 20 January 2021 were within time. (¶¶ 19, 20, 21)
- Article 142, Constitution of IndiaThe extraordinary pandemic orders, particularly the later directions excluding time for outer condonable limits, protected the defendants’ opportunity to file their defence. (¶¶ 6, 10, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21)
Held
- The later pandemic orders expressly excluded time in computing not only limitation but also outer periods within which delay could be condoned and periods governing termination of proceedings. The narrower basis underlying Sagufa Ahmed therefore did not govern this case after the expanded protection. (¶¶ 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18)
- The thirty-day period ended on 8 March 2020, but the 120-day outer period ended on 6 June 2020. Excluding the period under the subsequent Supreme Court orders made the applications filed on 20 January 2021 timely. Those orders benefited the defendants although issued after the High Court’s decision. (¶¶ 3, 20, 21)
- Following Prakash Corporates, the extraordinary exclusion could not be curtailed by the ordinary operation of the commercial-suit filing bar. The written statements had to be taken on record and the suit continued. (¶¶ 6, 18, 21, 22)
Result
Appeals allowed without costs. High Court judgment set aside; written statements filed on 20 January 2021 directed to be taken on record and the suit to proceed.