SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(Bom) 1147

A.P.SHAH, S.U.KAMDAR
Chintaman Sukhdeo Kaklij & others – Appellant
Versus
Shivaji Bhausaheb Gadhe & others – Respondent


JUDGMENT - SHAH A.P., J.:-Divergent opinions expressed by two learned Single Judges of this Court have necessitated the present reference to a larger Bench to resolve the conflict as regards the true and correct interpretation of Order 8, Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC for short). The question that falls for consideration is whether the Court can permit filing of written statement beyond the period of 90 days stipulated under Order 8, Rule 1 of the CPC. The reference arises in following manner.

2. In (Prabhakar Madhavrao Mule v. Bhagwan Mitharam)1, 2004(5) Bom.C.R. (A.B.)568 , Vagyani J., held that by virtue of recent amendment to the CPC by Act 22 of 2002, there is no alternative for the defendant to file written statement within 30 days from the date of service of suit summons and by virtue of proviso to Rule 1, Order 8 of the CPC, the written statement can be allowed to be filed on such other day for reason to be recorded in writing, but in any case not later than 90 days from the date of service of suit summons. Rule 1, Order 8 of CPC is mandatory in nature and it requires strict compliance. The time cannot be extended under Order 8, Rule 9 of the CPC as filing of writ

































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top