The court emphasizes balancing procedural compliance with the right to a fair hearing, allowing a petitioner to contest a suit despite previous non-compliance.

The private opposite parties are not represented despite service.

Heard learned counsels for the petitioner.

The petitioner is aggrieved of the order passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Siliguri on June 07, 2024 in Title Suit No. 153 of 2022 turning down the application filed by him under Order IX Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure and fixing the suit for exparte hearing.

It appears that the petitioner (defendant no. 1 in the suit) initially appeared before the learned trial Court but failed to take steps on a subsequent date, nor did he file written statement within the statutory period of time. The suit was fixed for exparte hearing by the learned trial Court. The petitioner filed an application under Order IX Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure along with written statement and written objection to the application filed by the plaintiffs/opposite parties under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure . The application was rejected and the written statement and written objection not accepted.

The reasons assigned by the petitioner for not appearing before the learned trial Court on the relevant date and failing to file the written statement within the statutory period of time are far from satisfactory.

However, since the petitioner seeks to contest the suit before the learned trial Court, he may be granted such opportunity in the interest of justice.

Accordingly, the revisional application being C.O.

No. 14 of 2025 is allowed. The order impugned dated June 07, 2024 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Siliguri in Title Suit No. 153 of 2022 is set aside.

The learned trial Court is directed to accept the written statement and written objection filed by the petitioner/defendant no. 1 and allow the petitioner to contest the suit subject to condition that the petitioner shall appear before the learned trial Court on every date of hearing fixed by the learned Court and shall not pray for any adjournment without justifiable cause.

As a consequence, the application being CAN No. 1 of 2025 is disposed of.

Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the respondents.

There will be no order as to costs.