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

2005 Supreme(Chh) 67

S.S.JHA
Narendra Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Manju Agarwal – Respondent


ORDER

S.S. Jha, J.

1. This petition under Article 227 is filed by the defendant.

2. Respondent No. 1 has filed a civil suit for declaration, partition and permanent injunction. After plaint was filed, petitioner was noticed and after service of notice, petitioner has not filed the written statement. Petitioner then filed an application on 20th August, 2004 under Section 151, CPC and prayed that since he is serving at Delhi, therefore, he could not file written statement and counter claim. Counsel for the defendant has received the counter claim by courier, same be taken on record. Trial Court has rejected the prayer and refused to accept the written statement alongwith counter claim. Trial Court has recorded a finding that defendant No. 4 is present through his Counsel from 26-6-2003 but written statement and counter claim was submitted on 20th August, 2004 and written statement was not filed for about one year. Reason for not fling the written statement is that defendant is serving at Delhi and the reason has not been found suitable by Trial Court. Trial Court has considered the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure, wherein it is directed that written statement should be filed withi


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