Supreme Court - Daily Orders
M/S. Tdi Infrastructure Ltd vs Vikram Barwal on 3 November, 2025
Author: J.K. Maheshwari
Bench: J.K. Maheshwari
1
ITEM NO.55 COURT NO.4 SECTION XIV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 10572/2025
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 20-11-2024
in CM(M) No. 33/2024 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New
Delhi]
M/S. TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
VIKRAM BARWAL & ORS. Respondent(s)
IA No. 85431/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/
ANNEXURES)
WITH
SLP(C) No. 29259/2025 (XIV)
(IA No. 231888/2025 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA
No.231889/2025 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING/CURING THE
DEFECTS
Date : 03-11-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
For Petitioner(s) :Ms. Kanika Agnihotri, Adv.
Mr. Himaghn Jain, Adv.
Ms. Niharika Ahluwalia, AOR
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Chandrachur Bhattacharyya, Adv.
Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. Delay condoned.
2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on perusal Signature Not Verified of the findings of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Digitally signed by Gulshan Kumar Arora Date: 2025.11.11 12:57:48 IST Reason: 2 Commission (‘NCDRC’), the dispute, is, in fact centered on the date of service of the summons. The NCDRC had called for a report from the concerned Post Office and relying thereon the contention of the petitioner for extension of time to file written statement was not found bona fide.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents has placed reliance on a judgment of a Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. Reported in (2015) 16 SCC 20 and submitted that no extension can be allowed.
4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and in the peculiar facts of this case, wherein it has not been enquired as to on which date and to whom the notice was served, we are of the view that subject to imposition of costs, the petitioner may be permitted to file written statement.
5. In view of the foregoing, the order impugned passed by the High Court and NCDRC stand set aside. Application seeking extension of time to file written statement is allowed subject to payment of cost of Rs.35,000/- per party.
6. Accordingly, the cost be calculated and be deposited before the NCDRC within two weeks from the date of uploading of this order. On deposit within the period of two weeks, the written statement be filed and the case be decided on merit. It is 3 needless to say that the cost so deposited be disbursed to the parties by NCDRC in their respective accounts.
7. Accordingly, the special leave petitions are disposed of. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
(GULSHAN KUMAR ARORA) (NAND KISHOR)
AR-CUM-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR