The High Court has power to enlarge time for filing written statement beyond 90 days from the date of service of summons in a suit in the ordinary civil jurisdiction of the High Court, in view of the provisions of Section 129 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and Rule 46 of Chapter XXXVIII of the Original Side Rules of the Calcutta High Court.

( 1 ) THE plaintiff institutes this suit for recovery of damages for defamation, which has been tentatively assessed at rs. 50,00,000. 00 (Rupees fifty lakh) only, against the defendants named in this suit.

( 2 ) THE summons of this suit has been served on the defendant no. 7 on March 11, 2004.

( 3 ) THIS suit has been instituted on or about January 29, 2004. Therefore, the Code of Civil Procedure, as amended by Amendment act of 1999 and 2002, is applicable in this case.

( 4 ) ORDER VIII, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure as substituted by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2002 runs as under:"1. Written Statement.-The defendant shall, within thirty days from the date of service of summons on him, present a written statement of his defence: provided that where the defendant fails to file the written statement within the said period of thirty days, he shall be allowed to file the same on such other day, as may be specified by the court, for reasons to be recorded in writing, but which shall not be later than ninety days from the date of service of summons. "

( 5 ) AS I have indicated hereinabove, the writ of summons has been served on the defendant No. 7 on March 11, 2004. Therefore, the prescribed period for filing written statement by the said defendant no. 7 expires on April 10, 2004. However, as provided in the proviso to Rule 1 of Order VIII the time to file written statement by a defendant may be extended by the Court, for reasons to be recorded in writing, but which shall not be later than ninety days from he date of service of summons. Total period, therefore, cannot exceed ninety days from the date of service of summons on the defendant. Ninety days, in this case, expires on June 9, 2004.

( 6 ) THE defendant No. 7, however, on July 23, 2004 files the present application for extension of time for filing his written statement. In the said application it has been stated that due to illness of his wife, the defendant No. 7 was not in a position to contact his learned advocate and as such could not give instructions to him for filing the written statement. After his wife recovered from illness, the defendant no. 7 contacted his learned advocate. The learned advocate-on-record, thereafter, briefed learned counsel to draw the written statement. The written statement has been prepared and the same has, already, been filed.

( 7 ) MS. Sukanya Banerjee, learned advocate, appearing in support of the application filed by the defendant No. 7, submits that due to the said illness of the wife of the defendant No. 7, the written statement could not be filed in time and she prays for extension of time for filing of the written statement. When her attention was drawn to the amended provisions of Rule 1 of Order VIII of the Code of Civil procedure Ms. Banerjee submits that this is a suit in the ordinary civil jurisdiction of this Court and in view of the provisions of Rule 46 of Chapter XXXVIII of the Original Side Rules, this Court has power to enlarge time.

( 8 ) THE said Rule runs as under:"46. Power to enlarge or abridge time.-The Court or a Judge shall have power to enlarge or abridge the time appointed by these rules, or fixed by any order enlarging time, for doing any act or taking any proceeding, upon such terms (if any) as the justice of the case may require, and any such enlargement may be ordered, although the application for the same is not made until after the expiration of the time appointed or allowed. "

( 9 ) MS. Banerjee, also, draws my attention to section 129 of the code of Civil Procedure empowering the High Courts to make rules to regulate their own procedures in the exercise of their ordinary original civil jurisdiction.

( 10 ) SAID section 129 runs as under:"129. Power of High Courts to make rules as to their original civil procedure.-Notwithstanding anything in this Code, any High court not being the Court of a Judicial Commissioner may make such rules not inconsistent with