Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J
Deep Narayan Singh Son Of Late Dharamdeo Singh – Appellant
Versus
Prem Kumar Srivastava @ Goralal Sriduriya, Son Of Late Ramdhani Lal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the opposite party nos.1 to 4.
2. It has been pointed out that the notice upon opposite party nos.5 and 6, who were the proforma opposite parties, have been dispensed with by the earlier order dated 18.11.2024.
3. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the order dated 14.02.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)-I, Koderma in Original Suit No.79 of 2019, by which the learned court has been pleased to dismiss the prayer to accept the written statement along with the counter claim filed by the defendant No. 3.
4. Mr. Bhaiya V. Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner confined his prayer for filing written statement and he is not pressing the counter-claim prayer.
5. Mr. Bhaiya V. Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the opposite parties/plaintiffs instituted Original Suit No. 79 of 2019 in the court of learned Sub-Judge-I, Koderma against the defendants praying therein a decree for execution of the right, title, interest and possession over the su
The court ruled that delays in filing written statements can be excused under exceptional circumstances, such as judicial custody and pandemics, interpreting procedural rules as directory rather than....
The provisions for filing written statements are directory, allowing for late submissions if satisfactory reasons for delay are provided.
The court retains discretion to accept late written statements in exceptional cases, but defendants must provide valid reasons for delays, as emphasized in Article 227 of the Constitution and Order V....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the stipulated period for filing written statements can be affected by external factors such as the Covid-19 pandemic, and a statutory right c....
The court held that the provisions of Order 8 Rule 1 CPC are directory, allowing for judicial discretion in extending the time for filing written statements.
The time limit for filing a written statement under Order VIII Rule 1 is directory, allowing courts discretion to extend deadlines based on case circumstances.
Civil Suit - Collaboration Agreement - Absence of any cogent explanation forthcoming for inaction of petitioner/defendant, till 20th August 2020, Trial Court rightly dismissed the application under O....
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 time for filing a written statement under Order VIII Rule 1 of CPC can be extended only in exceptional circumstances, underscoring the importance of adhering to procedural timelines.
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
