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

2006 Supreme(P&H) 626

HEMANT GUPTA
Natha Singh – Appellant
Versus
Satish Kumar – Respondent


Judgment

HEMANT GUPTA, J.

1. The present revision petition is directed against the order passed by the learned trial Court on 2.11.2004 whereby the defence of the defendant was struck off for non filing of written statement within 90 days.

2. The defendant has filed written statement on 2.11.2004 but the court found that since the same has been filed beyond 90 days, such written statement cannot be taken on record. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the impugned order passed by the learned trial court suffers from patent illegality and material irregularity. Once written statement was filed, there was no reason to strike off the defence of the defendant. The order passed by the learned trial Court negates the cause of justice.

3. Consequently, the revision petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 2.11.2004 is set aside. The written statement already filed by the defendant-petitioner is permitted to be taken on record with liberty to petitioner to file documents attached with the written statement on the date fixed before the trial Court. The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly.

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