Back
MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI
Shanti Subba – Appellant
Versus
Jashang Subba – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Meenakshi Madan Rai; ACJ. - The Petitioners are before this Court seeking directions for setting aside the impugned Order, dated 30.03.2021, of the Learned District Judge, Special Division-II, Sikkim at Gangtok, in Title Suit No.14 of 2018 (Shri Jashang Subba v. Smt. Shanti Subba and Others), vide which the Learned Trial Court disallowed the Petitioners from filing their Written Statements in the Title Suit.
2.(i) The facts relevant for the present purposes are narrated in seriatim hereinbelow for clarity.
(ii) On 29.09.2018, the Respondent filed a Suit before the Learned Trial Court against the Petitioners for Declaration, Recovery of Possession, Injunction and other Consequential Reliefs, pertaining to a Plot of land situated at Tumlabong, Ranipool, East Sikkim. Summons was received by the Petitioners on 08.10.2018 and appearance through Counsel made before the Learned Court on 26.10.2018, the date previously fixed. The matter was posted for filing of Written Statement on 05.12.2018. On the relevant day i.e. 05.12.2018, instead of filing the Written Statement, the Petitioners filed an Application under Order VII Rule 11 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure
The court held that procedural unfairness due to technical irregularities can justify allowing the filing of Written Statements after delays, emphasizing the importance of justice over procedural str....
The striking off of a defendant's defence due to late filing of a written statement, despite court's extension, is unjustifiable, and such extensions are regarded as directory rather than mandatory, ....
Defendants must file a formal application to extend time for the written statement beyond thirty days, as failure to do so results in forfeiture of the right to file.
The court affirmed that defendants lose the right to file a written statement if not submitted within the prescribed 120 days, highlighting the necessity of adhering to procedural timelines in commer....
The court has discretionary power to condone the delay in filing the written statement, subject to a stricter yardstick for non-commercial suits, and the defendant should be given an opportunity to e....
The court ruled that the limitation for filing a written statement is strict and can only be extended in exceptional circumstances, which were not present in this case.
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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the defendant to file the written statement within the prescribed period, the consequences of failing to do so, and the applica....
The court affirmed that procedural rules regarding the filing of written statements can be interpreted flexibly to ensure justice, allowing extensions in exceptional circumstances.
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
