Claim No: CFI 055/2020

IN THE DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE COURTS

IN THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

BETWEEN

NS INVESTMENTS LIMITED

Claimant

and

AJAY SETHI

Defendant

ORDER WITH REASONS OF H.E. DEPUTY CHIEF JUSTICE ALI AL MADHANI

UPON the Judgment of H.E. Deputy Chief Justice Ali Al Madhani dated 27 September 2023 (the “Judgment”)

AND UPON the Order with Reasons of H.E. Deputy Chief Justice Ali Al Madhani dated 7 February 2025 awarding 50% of the Defendant’s legal costs (the “Costs Order”)

AND UPON the Claimant’s Application No. CFI-055-2020/14 dated 28 January 2026 seeking an extension of time to commence detailed assessment costs (the “Application”)

AND PURSUANT TO the Rules of the DIFC Courts (“RDC”)

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. The Application is granted.

2. Costs are awarded to the Defendant on the standard basis, to be assessed by the Court by way of submissions if not agreed.

Issued by:
Delvin Sumo
Assistant Registrar
Date of issue: 4 March 2026
At: 12pm

1. The Defendant has brought this Application, relying on the Seventh Witness Statement of Salah Mattoo dated 28 January 2026 (“SM7”), to seek an extension of time, being eight (8) weeks total, to commence detailed costs assessment proceedings pursuant to the Order with Reasons of Deputy Chief Justice Ali Al Madhani dated 21 January 2026.

2. As it is unnecessary at this point of proceedings, I will dispense with a full reiteration of the background and procedural history, and only repeat what is deemed necessary for the purpose of the Application.

3. By way of summary of SM7, the basis of this Application is that the Defendant wishes to first enforce the unpaid 50% interim costs awarded, as well as to promote procedural efficiency through coordination with any assessment proceedings by the Claimant and to account for practical delays arising from the Ramadan and Eid period.

4. On 7 February 2025, the Order with Reasons requiring the Claimant to pay 50% of the Defendant’s costs by 14 February 2025 was issued (the “Costs Order”), granting the Defendant interim recovery of costs incurred in defending the Claim. The Claimant has not complied and has made no payment.

5. On 21 January 2026, the Court granted the Claimant’s application requiring the Defendant to commence detailed costs assessment proceedings within five working days and rejected the Claimant’s attempt to stay the Costs Order.

6. On 26 January 2026, the Court Registry directed by email that any extension of time must be sought by Consent Order or, failing agreement, by formal application. Although the Defendant sought the Claimant’s consent to an extension, this was refused, prompting the Application being filed. The Defendant seeks additional time to first enforce payment of the unpaid interim costs, to coordinate any assessment proceedings efficiently with those anticipated by the Claimant, and to account for practical delays arising from the Ramadan and Eid period, relying on the ordinary practice that a successful party may enforce an interim costs order before incurring further expense in detailed assessment. Accordingly, the Defendant requests an eight-week extension to commence detailed costs assessment proceedings and any further relief the Court considers appropriate.

7. The Extension Application was filed on 28 January 2026 and the certificate of service filed on 3 February 2026 to confirm that service was affected on 15 January 2026. Therefore, the time for the Defendant to file evidence in answer has now lapsed pursuant to Rule 23.41(2) of the Rules of the DFC Courts, I accept that this Application is therefore uncontested.

8. As the Application goes uncontested, and considering that the extension sought is not excessive, I see no reason not to grant the Application.

9. Costs of the Application are awarded to the Defendant on the standard basis, to be assessed by the Court by way of submission if not agreed.