Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH
Jharna Shyanal W/o Sri Swapan Shyanal – Appellant
Versus
Mira Rani Saha – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
Heard Mr. J. Sharma, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. L. Talukdar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.
2. The petitioner herein has approached this Court challenging the order dated 03.03.2021 passed by the learned Court of the Munsiff No.2, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati in Title Suit No.43/2019 whereby the application filed under Order IX Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘the Code’) was rejected on the ground that the cause shown in the said application was not a good cause.
3. This Court has duly perused the order dated 27.06.2019 whereby the learned Trial Court taking into account that the service of summons was duly effected on 22.02.2019 and the written statement was not filed have proceeded with the suit to the stage of ADR/Issues thereby fixing the matter on 01.08.2019. On the next date, an application was filed by the petitioner stating the grounds why the written statement could not be filed on 27.06.2019.
4. The respondents herein had filed their written objection to the said application and pursuant thereto, the learned Trial Court had passed the order dated 03.03.2021 where
The right to file a written statement is essential and must be prioritized, though negligence can affect the outcome of such permissions.
The court ruled that a party's right to file a written statement should not be denied due to delay, provided costs are imposed, emphasizing the importance of a fair trial.
The provisions of Order VIII Rule 1 of C.P.C. are directory, allowing courts discretion to extend time for filing written statements.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the defendant to file the written statement within the prescribed period, the consequences of failing to do so, and the applica....
The court ruled that the limitation for filing a written statement is strict and can only be extended in exceptional circumstances, which were not present in this case.
The court emphasized the discretion of the court to allow the defendant to file a written statement even after the expiry of the 90-day period, highlighting that the time for filing a written stateme....
Procedural law should advance substantial justice, and in case of conflict, the court should lean towards substantial justice.
The court upheld strict adherence to procedural timelines for filing written statements, requiring exceptional circumstances for any delay beyond stipulated periods.
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
