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

2024 Supreme(Jhk) 560

SUBHASH CHAND
Mosomat Dukho Orain W/o Late Vasu Oraon – Appellant
Versus
Sheikh Khalil Son of Late Seikh Habibullah – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is present but no one appears on behalf of respondents despite repeated requisites being filed on behalf of the petitioners for service of notice to them.

2. It appears that the respondents are having no interest. Accordingly, the service of notice to them is deemed sufficient.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.

4. This writ petition has been preferred against the order dated 18th March, 2017 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)-I, Lohardaga in Title Suit No. 03 of 2012, whereby the learned trial court has rejected the application of the defendants (petitioners herein) filed under Order VIII Rule 1 read with Section 151 of the C.P.C., wherein prayer had been made to accept the written statement of the defendant beyond the statutory period of 90 days.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the Title Suit No. 03 of 2012 (Sheikh Khalil & Ors. vs. Mosomat Dukho Orain & Ors.) he had appeared on 3rd September, 2012 but could not file the written statement on their behalf and the learned trial court had debarred the defendants to file the written statement vide order dated 5th February, 2013

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