Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
S.G.Chapalgaonkar
Suryakant Bhagwandas Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Radhakishan Khushaldas Chawla – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of procedural history and orders. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments for and against setting aside orders. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's observations on conduct of parties. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. legal reasoning against interference. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. conclusion and dismissal of the writ petition. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
JUDGMENT :
S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With consent of the parties, matter is taken up for final hearing at admission stage.
2. The present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to multiple orders passed by Civil Judge Senior Division, Dhule in Special Civil Suit No.108/2021, which are described in tabular from for brevity as under:
| Sr. No. | Date of Order | Exhibit Nos. | Particulars |
| 1. | 23.08.2024 | 1 | Closing evidence of defendants. |
| 2. | 18.12.2024 | 59 | Application to set aside no-cross order dated 10.04.2024 and permit to cross- examine plaintiffs’ witness is rejected. |
| 3. | 18.02.2025 | 61 | Application to set aside no written statement order dated 19.04.2022 and accept his written statement alongwith counter claim is rejected. |
3. The respondent nos.1 to 4 (original plaintiffs) filed Special Civil Suit
The court emphasized that procedural delays and negligence in filing written statements cannot justify the reversal of trial court orders, affirming the necessity of adhering to procedural rules.
Failure to adhere to the provisions of law and failure to comply with court orders can result in the rejection of applications and dismissal of the petition.
The court upheld the decision to deny the filing of a written statement due to failure to give valid reasons for delay, reiterating that extensions must be granted only in exceptional cases.
The time limit for filing a written statement can be extended only in exceptionally hard cases, and the court's discretion to extend the time should not be routinely exercised.
The court upheld the dismissal of the writ petition due to the petitioner's failure to file written statements within the stipulated time, emphasizing adherence to procedural timelines.
Trial Courts have discretion to grant last opportunities for filing written statements, emphasizing that extensions should not be routine but can be justified based on case circumstances.
The court has the discretion to allow the advancement of hearing and set aside orders declining to take pleadings on record, subject to specified conditions.
The court retains discretion to accept late written statements in exceptional cases, but defendants must provide valid reasons for delays, as emphasized in Article 227 of the Constitution and Order V....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
