Back
ASHOK KUMAR GAUR
Manju Saini D/o Late Shri Moti Lal – Appellant
Versus
Shri Digambar Jain Mandir- Vaidan – Respondent
ORDER
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 04.10.2018, whereby the Court below has refused to take written statement on record as the same was filed beyond the period of 90 days.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had engaged a lawyer to appear in the Civil Court after receipt of notices and as such Vakalatnama was filed on her behalf on 09.01.2018.
3. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner moved an application to provide copy of document (Map), which was not annexed with the suit and finally the same was supplied to the petitioner on 05.04.2018.
4. Learned counsel submitted that after 05.04.2018, the next date was fixed on 24.05.2018 and counsel for the petitioner could not file the written statement due to unavoidable circumstances and on the next date i.e. on 04.07.2018, the Court below has refused to take the written statement on record.
5. Learned counsel submitted that there has been no intention of delaying the said proceedings and the period prescribed under Order 8 Rule 1 CPC of filing written statement is only directory and if the sufficient reasons are given before the Court below, the Court
The provision for filing a written statement within 90 days is not mandatory, and the court can permit filing of the written statement even after the period of 90 days if sufficient reasons are given....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the provisions of Order VIII Rule 1 CPC are procedural and not mandatory, and in non-commercial suits, the court has the power to condone the ....
The judgment emphasized the mandatory nature of the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act regarding the time period for filing a written statement in Commercial Suits, and the consequences of faili....
The provisions of Order VIII Rule 1 of C.P.C. are directory, allowing courts discretion to extend time for filing written statements.
The time of 90 days prescribed for filing written statement under Order VIII Rule 1 of CPC in an ordinary suit is directory and not mandatory. The court has the discretion to grant further time to th....
Parties should be allowed to file written statements to ensure cases are adjudicated on merits, not mere technicalities, provided justifiable reasons for delays are shown.
The court upheld strict adherence to procedural timelines for filing written statements, requiring exceptional circumstances for any delay beyond stipulated periods.
The right to file a written statement is forfeited if not submitted within the statutory period, and courts lack discretion to extend this period.
Strict adherence to procedural deadlines for filing written statements is essential; ignorance of law does not excuse late filings.
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
