Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Written Statement Filing Period - As per Order 8 Rule 1 of the CPC, a defendant is required to file a written statement within 30 days from the date of service of summons ["Ramesh Flowers Private Ltd. VS Sumit Srimal - Madras"]. If the defendant fails to do so within this period, they may be permitted to file it later up to 90 days, provided they seek condonation of delay and justify the reasons for late filing ["Devraj Singh VS Babli Devi - Allahabad"] ["Amna Khatoon VS Bibi Madina - Jharkhand"] ["Abdul Jalil Laskar S/o- Lt. Irfan Ali Laskar VS Md. Monir Uddin Laskar - Gauhati"] ["VEELINE HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED vs KHETAWAT PROPERTIES LIMITED - Calcutta"] ["Rama alias Rita Devi W/o Shri Ranjeet Singh VS Ashwani Kumar S/o Late Shri Sarwan Singh - Himachal Pradesh"].
Extension of Time and Condonation - Courts may allow filing beyond the initial 30 days up to 90 days upon proper application and showing valid reasons for delay. The law emphasizes that the 30-day period is mandatory, but extensions are permissible only with recorded reasons ["Ramesh Flowers Private Ltd. VS Sumit Srimal - Madras"] ["Devraj Singh VS Babli Devi - Allahabad"] ["VEELINE HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED vs KHETAWAT PROPERTIES LIMITED - Calcutta"] ["Rama alias Rita Devi W/o Shri Ranjeet Singh VS Ashwani Kumar S/o Late Shri Sarwan Singh - Himachal Pradesh"].
Marriage and Divorce Petitions - In marriage or divorce cases, similar principles apply: the respondent's say or statement is also required to be filed within thirty days of service of summons, aligning with CPC provisions. The respondent's say in a marriage petition is also expected within this period, and failure to do so may lead to ex parte proceedings or other legal consequences ["Jaya Kumari Singh VS Shrey Kumar @ Shrya Kumar - Current Civil Cases"].
Specific Court Practices - Courts generally allow a maximum of 90 days for filing written statements, including condonation of delays, but beyond that, courts typically reject late filings unless exceptional reasons are provided ["Ghanshyam Das Agarwal VS Anoop Kumar - Allahabad"] ["Iqbal Khan vs Zakir Khan - Madhya Pradesh"].
Summary - The main point is that under CPC, a written statement by the defendant in civil suits, including marriage or divorce petitions, must be filed within 30 days of service of summons. Courts may permit delays up to 90 days if proper reasons are recorded and condonation is granted. The respondent's say in marriage petitions is similarly expected within this timeframe, and filing beyond this without court approval may result in penalties or ex parte orders.
References:- ["Ramesh Flowers Private Ltd. VS Sumit Srimal - Madras"]- ["Devraj Singh VS Babli Devi - Allahabad"]- ["Amna Khatoon VS Bibi Madina - Jharkhand"]- ["Abdul Jalil Laskar S/o- Lt. Irfan Ali Laskar VS Md. Monir Uddin Laskar - Gauhati"]- ["VEELINE HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED vs KHETAWAT PROPERTIES LIMITED - Calcutta"]- ["Rama alias Rita Devi W/o Shri Ranjeet Singh VS Ashwani Kumar S/o Late Shri Sarwan Singh - Himachal Pradesh"]- ["Jaya Kumari Singh VS Shrey Kumar @ Shrya Kumar - Current Civil Cases"]
In civil litigation under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), defendants are typically required to file a written statement within 30 days of receiving summons. But what about matrimonial proceedings? A common question arises: like the written statement by a defendant in a civil suit according to CPC, is the 'say' by the Respondent in a marriage petition also required to be filed in thirty days? This query highlights procedural similarities and differences between general civil suits and family law matters, particularly under CPC Order VIII Rule 1.
This post explores the timelines, court discretion for extensions, and how these rules apply—or analogize—to marriage petitions. While CPC governs many aspects, family courts often apply similar principles with flexibility to ensure justice. Note: This is general information based on judicial precedents and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your case.
Order VIII Rule 1 of the CPC mandates that The Defendant shall, within thirty days from the date of service of summons on him, present a written statement of his defence ANIL KUMAR AGGARWAL Vs. USHA GARG & ANR. - 2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 19560. If missed, the court may allow filing on another day, not later than 90 days from service, with reasons recorded in writing Nizam Ali S/o Sunhar Ali VS Krishna Kumar S/o Ramkhilawan - 2022 Supreme(Chh) 453.
Key timelines:- Initial period: 30 days from summons service Manoj Kumar VS Mevaram Mehta - 2005 0 Supreme(Raj) 1575.- Extension: Up to 90 days total, discretionary, requiring recorded reasons and often costs Sunita Devi VS Republic Tractor Motor Pvt. Ltd. - 2021 0 Supreme(Jhk) 212Rani Kusum VS Kanchan Devi - 2005 5 Supreme 620.
Courts view this as directory, not mandatory. As one judgment notes, the time of 90 days prescribed for filing written statement... is directory and not mandatory, and that courts possess the discretion to grant further time in exceptional cases Sunita Devi VS Republic Tractor Motor Pvt. Ltd. - 2021 0 Supreme(Jhk) 212. Failure to file timely doesn't bar the statement if due diligence is shown and justice demands it Manoj Kumar VS Mevaram Mehta - 2005 0 Supreme(Raj) 1575.
Marriage petitions, often filed under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, or similar laws, are handled by family courts established under the Family Courts Act, 1984. Section 7 of the Family Courts Act empowers these courts to follow CPC procedures with adaptations for speedy justice.
Does the 30-day rule apply directly to the respondent's say (equivalent to a written statement)? Judicial trends suggest similar timelines and flexibility. For instance, in a case involving family disputes, the court allowed a written statement despite delay, considering Family Courts Act provisions and CPC Order VIII Rule 1 as directory MANOJ KUMAR vs MEVARAM MEHTA. The petitioner there contended jurisdictional issues under Section 7, but the court permitted filing subject to costs, emphasizing procedural rules facilitate justice.
In another ruling, the defendant is required to file written statement within thirty days from the date of service of written statement in thirty days and thereafter, in ninety days MANOJ KUMAR vs MEVARAM MEHTA. This mirrors CPC, indicating respondents in matrimonial cases face comparable deadlines, though family courts prioritize reconciliation and may extend more liberally.
Courts consistently hold that procedural timelines under Order VIII are handmaids of justice, not rigid barriers. Extensions beyond 30 days (up to 90) require:- Recorded reasons in writing Manoj Kumar VS Mevaram Mehta - 2005 0 Supreme(Raj) 1575.- Due diligence by the defendant/respondent Sunita Devi VS Republic Tractor Motor Pvt. Ltd. - 2021 0 Supreme(Jhk) 212.- Costs to the opposing party in many cases Rani Kusum VS Kanchan Devi - 2005 5 Supreme 620.
Beyond 90 days? Possible under inherent powers (Section 151 CPC) in exceptional circumstances, like death of a party or service issues Dinesh Srivastava VS Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) No. 2, Bharatpur - 2019 Supreme(Raj) 798. One court affirmed: The power granted under Order 8 Rule 1 CPC to file a written statement within 90 days is directory in nature and not mandatory. The Court can extend the time in certain circumstances Dinesh Srivastava VS Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) No. 2, Bharatpur - 2019 Supreme(Raj) 798.
In a family-related context, delays of 88-125 days were condoned with costs, as provisions of Order VIII, Rule 1 of the CPC are procedural and can be interpreted flexibly to allow extensions in exceptional cases (from case summary in sources). Similarly, in patent suits with high stakes, courts directed acceptance of late filings to avoid injustice Balaji Industrial Products Limited VS AIA Engineering Limited - 2018 Supreme(Raj) 862.
Whether in civil suits or marriage petitions, the response must:- Address material facts and denials.- Raise defenses, objections, and counter-claims.- Be verified with an affidavit.
In matrimonial cases, it might include grounds for divorce denial, reconciliation pleas, or jurisdictional challenges. Courts reject vague or belated filings without cause Hafizur Rehman @ Pappu VS Kahkashan Begum - 2019 Supreme(All) 500.
In family courts, unique factors like emotional stakes or mediation may influence discretion, as seen in cases allowing filings despite Order VII Rule 11 dismissals (Family Courts Act interplay).
To navigate these timelines effectively:1. File promptly within 30 days to avoid complications ANIL KUMAR AGGARWAL Vs. USHA GARG & ANR. - 2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 19560.2. Seek extension early with affidavit explaining delay and due diligence proof Sunita Devi VS Republic Tractor Motor Pvt. Ltd. - 2021 0 Supreme(Jhk) 212.3. Pay costs if ordered, to demonstrate good faith Rani Kusum VS Kanchan Devi - 2005 5 Supreme 620.4. In marriage petitions, coordinate with family court rules; cite CPC analogies for extensions.5. Avoid negligence: Courts deny relief for lack of vigilance Dinesh Srivastava VS Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) No. 2, Bharatpur - 2019 Supreme(Raj) 798.
Understanding these nuances can prevent procedural pitfalls. For tailored guidance in civil or matrimonial matters, engage a legal expert promptly. Judicial precedents evolve, so stay informed.
References (select judgments):- Manoj Kumar VS Mevaram Mehta - 2005 0 Supreme(Raj) 1575, Sunita Devi VS Republic Tractor Motor Pvt. Ltd. - 2021 0 Supreme(Jhk) 212, Rani Kusum VS Kanchan Devi - 2005 5 Supreme 620, MANOJ KUMAR vs MEVARAM MEHTA, Dinesh Srivastava VS Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) No. 2, Bharatpur - 2019 Supreme(Raj) 798, Atfur Rahman VS State of Assam - 2019 Supreme(Gau) 1182.
Word count: ~950. This analysis draws from established CPC interpretations and related family law applications.
#CPCWrittenStatement, #MarriagePetition, #FamilyLawIndia
COMMON ORDER Order 8 Rule 1 of CPC states that written statement should be filed within thirty days from the date of service of summons on the defendant. ... Order 8 Rule 1 of CPC states that the defendant shall within thirty days from the date of service of summons on him present a written statement of his defence. ... Any written st....
Along with her application dated 10.04.2018, defendant-respondent has also filed his written statement paper No. 46-Ka. ... —The Defendant shall, within thirty days from the date of service of summons on him, present a written statement of his defence: Provided that where the defendant fails to file the written statement within the said period ....
-The defendant shall, within thirty days from the date of service of summons on him, present a written statement of his defence:Provided that where the defendant fails to file the written statement within the said period of thirty days, he shall be allowed to file the same on such ... -The defendant shall, within thirty days from the date of service of summons o....
thirty days as provided under Rule 1 of Order 8 CPC. ... , the defendant is required to file written statement within thirty days from the date of service of written statement in thirty days and thereafter, in ninety days. ... to file written statement beyond the period of thirty #HL_STA....
—The Defendant shall, within thirty days from the date of service of summons on him, present a written statement of his defence: Provided that where the defendant fails to file the written statement within the said period of thirty days, he shall be allowed to file the same on such other ... Needless to say that as per law, the petitioner was required to file the writ....
According to the CPC, the defendant is required to file the written statement within thirty days from the date of service of summons, which period may be extended by the Court up to ninety days. 8. ... The learned trial Court vide impugned order rejected the application filed by petitioner/defendant No.1 under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC by closing his right to file the writ....
Written statement:- The defendant shall, within thirty days from the date of service of summons on him, present a written statement of his defence: Provided that where the defendant fails to file the written statement within the said period of thirty days, he shall be allowed to ... Reverting back to the facts of the present case, it is quite vivid that the trial Court itself has....
Written statement-The defendant shall, within thirty days from the date of service of summons on him, present a written statement of his defence: Provided that where the defendant fails to file the written statement within the said period of thirty days, he shall be allowed to file ... It is also stated in the petition that after impleadment of....
This has happened because of the fact that as per Rule 1 of Order 8 CPC, the defendant is required to file written statement within thirty days from the date of service of summons on him. ... The petitioner/plaintiff says that the delay with which he has raised objection is immaterial and the delay which was committed by the respondent/defendant in contesting the suit is more material to the extent that the #HL_STA....
—The Defendant shall, within thirty days from the date of service of summons on him, present a written statement of his defence: Provided that where the defendant fails to file the written statement within the said period of thirty days, he shall be allowed to file the same on such other day, as may ... The defendants say that the defendants have affirmed their respective affidavits of the #HL_STA....
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner - Mr. Manish Kumar Sharma submitted that the Court below has committed illegality in permitting the written statement to be filed beyond 90 days, as Order 8 Rule 1 CPC provides that written statement is required to be filed within 90 days.
A short question involved in this case is that according to amendment done in the Code of Civil Procedure, the written statement should have been filed by the defendant petitioner within a statutory stipulated period. Since the petitioner had not filed the written statement within period provided under Order VIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure i.e. the period of 90 days petitioner's application has been rejected by the trial Court as well as revisional Court on the ground that there is no provision for extension of time in the amended Code of Civil Procedure and acco....
In this regard, this court would like to make a reference to order VIII, rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (‘CPC’) whereunder the defendant is required to file the written statement within thirty days from the date of service of summons on him, provided where the defendant fails to file the written statement within the said thirty days, he shall be allowed to file the same on such other day as may be specified by the court, for reasons to be recorded in writing, but which shall not be later than ninety days from date of service of summons.
And if we are persuaded to hold so, the necessity of going into other questions would stand obviated. We are convinced that in a patent suit where huge stakes are being claimed by the parties, if the right to file written statement is forfeited at the outset, the inevitable consequence would initially be passing the order of temporary injunction and then the final decree against the petitioner-defendant. In the facts of the present case, the petitioner-defendant argues that it would be required to file written statement within 120 days from the date of rejection of the application ....
According to learned counsel the application-cum-complaint of respondent No. 2 came to be filed being the written statement/say of defendant in the civil proceeding i.e. R.C.S. No. 61 of 2014. The Civil Judge while exercising the powers of a civil court has no authority to pass such order under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. The application was filed with an intention to traverse the pleadings of the plaintiff. It was not a complaint or petition under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C.
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
