Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SANJAY VASHISTH, J.
Raj Kumar and Another - Petitioners
Versus
Kapil Dev and Others - Respondents
CR No. 3684 of 2023
Decided On : 09-08-2023
Written Statement - Civil Procedure - Order 8 Rule 1 of the CPC - [Order 8 Rule 1 of the CPC] - The court set aside the order striking off the defense of the defendants and granted them one more opportunity to file their written statements, subject to the payment of costs.
Fact of the Case:
The defendants challenged the order striking off their right to file a written statement due to non-compliance with the prescribed time limit.
Finding of the Court:
The court set aside the impugned order and granted the defendants one more opportunity to file their written statements, subject to the payment of costs.
Issues: Non-filing of written statement within the prescribed time, striking off defense, and granting of one more opportunity to file written statements.
Ratio Decidendi: The provisions of Order 8 Rule 1 of the CPC are directory in nature, and the court may exercise discretion to condone the delay in filing the written statement. The court should grant one more opportunity to file the written statement if it deems it appropriate for just and proper adjudication of the case.
Final Decision: The impugned order striking off the defense of the defendants was set aside, and the defendants were granted one more effective opportunity to file their written statements, subject to the payment of costs.
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay Vashisth, J.
1. Present revision petition has been preferred by the petitioners (defendant Nos.3 and 4) – Raj Kumar son of Jang Bahadur and Saneha wife of Raj Kumar, challenging the impugned order dated 19.12.2022, passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Jalandhar, whereby, rights of the petitioners/defendant Nos.3 and 4 has been ordered to be struck off, on account of non-filing of the written statement within the prescribed time.
2. Mr. Varun Goyal Advocate, puts in appearance on behalf of respondent No.1, and files his power of attorney in Court today, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Office to tag the same at appropriate place in case file.
3. After hearing the petitioners (defendant Nos.3 and 4), at the time of preliminary hearing on 03.07.2023, following order was passed:-
2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that suit was filed on 05 July, 2022, and the parties to the lis are closely related to each other. For the reason of not filing the written statement, defense of the petitioners (defendants No.3 & 4 in the suit) has been struck-off vide impugned order dated 19.12.2022 (P-6).
Further submits that if one opportunity is granted to the petitioners, subject to the payment of some costs, as directed by the Court, the required written statement would be filed, so that suit can be decided on its merits.
3. Notice of motion for 09.08.2023.”
4. It is also informed to the Court that the proceedings in the suit are at initial stage as the issues are yet to be framed.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners also relies upon the order dated 20.05.2022, passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in CR-1660-2020, titled as, “Paro and others vs. Mahindo”, wherein, in the similar circumstances, to avoid miscarriage of justice, the order of striking off defense was set-aside, and opportunity of filing of written statement was granted.
6. It is always the endeavour of the Court to have complete set of pleadings of all the respective parties so that rights of no one as party to the suit, gets prejudiced.
7. Even in the present case, plaintiff and the defendants are related to each other and therefore, counsel for the respondents herein (defendant Nos.1 and 2) also submits that subject to the payment of cost, petitioners (defendants No.3 and 4) can be granted one last opportunity for the purpose of filing of the written statement, if this Court considers it appropriate.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material on record.
9. Be that as it may, this Court has already taken note of the necessity of the filing of written statement and completion of the pleadings before the Court, more in the interest of imparting justice to the concerned parties.
10. Besides above, for deciding the small issue raised in the present petition, all the details are not required to be examined minutely. As per the view point of this Court, it is always desirable for the Court to find out solution by deciding the controversy after inviting response from all the concerned parties. Court cannot function on the principle of technicalities or in a specified mechanized manner. Therefore, it would always be fair to impart justice after giving reasonable opportunity to all the parties to plead their stand in writing in the shape of plaint, written statement and replication. In fact, pleadings are required for the just and proper adjudication of the case in the form of litigation before the Court.
11. From the referred jud
The court may exercise discretion to condone the delay in filing the written statement and grant one more opportunity if it deems it appropriate for just and proper adjudication of the case.
Courts must exercise discretion to grant opportunities for filing written statements after due circumspection, considering potential irreparable loss to the party.
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
