Everyday Industries India Ltd vs M/S R.D. Trade Links on 14 May, 2025

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Everyday Industries India Ltd vs M/S R.D. Trade Links on 14 May, 2025

Author: Rahul Bharti

Bench: Rahul Bharti

                                                   Serial No. 06


 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                 AT JAMMU
CM(M) No. 122/2025
CM No. 2679/2025

Everyday Industries India Ltd.
(Lighting) 1,
Middleton Street Kolkata 700071
Th. its Power of Attorney holder
Mr. Pranay Kumar Roy,
(Aged 50 years)
S/O Late Shri Prasanna Kumar Roy
R/o Flat No. 901, GAUR GANGA II,
Sector-4, Vaishali, Ghaziabad,
Uttar Pradesh , 201010
                                      .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)

                  Through: Mr. Sudesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate

             Vs

M/s R.D. Trade Links
Gali Gadadhar Mandir,
Upper Bazaar, Panjtirthi, Jammu.
Through its Proprietor
Mr. Rajinder Singh
(Aged 60 years)
S/o Sh. M. M. Singh,
R/o H.No.48, Upper Bazaar,
Panjtirthi, Jammu (U.T. of J&K)

                                                ..... Respondent(s)


                  Through:

CORAM:     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE
                          ORDER

(14.05.2025)

01. The petitioner is defendant in civil suit filed by the
respondent pending adjudication before the court of
Principal District Judge, Jammu as also being the
Commercial Court.

02. In the civil suit, the respondent is seeking money decree
for recovery of Rs. 19,92,647/- along with interest.

2 CM(M) No. 122/2025

03. The petitioner, as defendant, appeared in said civil suit,
filed written statement and simultaneously registered
counter claim for recovery of an amount of Rs.
1,72,163/-.

04. The written statement to the counter claim of the
petitioner/defendant came to be filed by the
respondent/plaintiff though, beyond the period of
limitation prescribed for filing the written statement but
the trial court of learned Principal District Judge, Jammu
came to entertain the written statement to the counter
claim of the petitioner/defendant in terms of order dated
25.09.2024 by condoning the delay which left the
petitioner/defendant aggrieved to come up with the
present petition under article 227 of the Constitution of
India after almost seven months of passing of the order
dated 25.09.2024 meaning thereby for seven months the
civil suit came to earn its proceedings which includes the
entertainment of the written statement to the counter
claim and therefore, this court cannot put the clock back
at the instance of the petitioner, hence the present
petition is accordingly, dismissed.

05. Copy of this order be sent to learned Principal District
Judge, Jammu by Registrar Judicial, Jammu for notice
and to be taken on record.

(RAHUL BHARTI)
JUDGE
JAMMU
14.05.2025
SUNIL