VIRAT MOHAN vs ADITYA BIRLA FINANCE LTD. — 469/2023
Case under Suits for Recovery and Damages Section NA. Status: Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence. Next hearing: 29th July 2026.
CS (COMM.) - CIVIL SUIT (COMMERCIAL)
CNR: DLND010072502023
Next Hearing
29th July 2026
e-Filing Number
18-08-2023
Filing Number
4301/2023
Filing Date
18-08-2023
Registration No
469/2023
Registration Date
19-08-2023
Court
District and Sessions Judge,New Delhi, PHC
Judge
13-District Judge-03
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
VIRAT MOHAN
Adv. Naman Sabharwal
Respondent(s)
ADITYA BIRLA FINANCE LTD.
Hearing History
Judge: 13-District Judge-03
Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence
Final Arguments
Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence
Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence
Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-03-2026 | Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence |
| 05-12-2025 | Final Arguments |
| 17-10-2025 | Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence |
| 17-09-2025 | Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence |
| 10-09-2025 | Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: CS 469/2023 - Virat Mohan v. Aditya Birla Finance Ltd. The defendant's application seeking condonation of delay in filing the written statement was dismissed. The court found that the defendant failed to provide satisfactory reasons for the 7+ month delay (summons served 04.09.2023, written statement filed 11.04.2024). Since a prior identical application had already been rejected on 11.12.2024, and no adequate grounds were presented, the application was rejected as not allowed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CS 469/2023 - Virat Mohan v. Aditya Birla Finance Ltd. The defendant's application seeking condonation of delay in filing the written statement was dismissed. The court found that the defendant failed to provide satisfactory reasons for the 7+ month delay (summons served 04.09.2023, written statement filed 11.04.2024). Since a prior identical application had already been rejected on 11.12.2024, and no adequate grounds were presented, the application was rejected as not allowed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts