AI Overview...
-
No Remand When Appearance Vakalatnama Filed but No Written Statement - Courts have held that the filing of a Vakalatnama (power of attorney) alone, without a subsequent written statement, does not automatically warrant remand or dismissal of the case. The defendant's appearance through counsel indicates participation in the proceedings, and failure to file a written statement can be excused if there is a sufficient cause, such as legal or procedural delays. Courts have emphasized that the absence of a written statement, when the defendant has appeared through counsel and shown intent to defend, does not justify remand or ex parte orders, provided the defendant is given an opportunity to comply BANK OF BARODA VS PIONEER GLOBEX PRIVATE LIMITED - Gujarat, BANK OF BARODA VS PIONEER GLOBEX PRIVATE LIMITED - Gujarat, Sunita Devi VS Republic Tractor Motor Pvt. Ltd. - Jharkhand, Udesing Dabhising @ Dahyabhai Galabhai Sodha Parmar VS Shanabhai Saburbhai Sodha Parmar - Gujarat, M. Venkata Subba Reddy VS State Bank of India, Main Branch, Cuddapah - Andhra Pradesh, Karan Kumar VS Rajinder Kumar Gupta - Jammu and Kashmir, SALIM HAMEED vs A THITHUMMA - Kerala, Simi Salim VS Tip Top Furniture Industries - Kerala, Mansarowar Ispat (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs M/s. Prakash Ferrous Industries Private Limited - Madras, Mansarowar Ispat (India) Pvt. Ltd. VS Prakash Ferrous Industries Private Limited Represented by its Director - Madras.
-
Sufficient Cause and Flexibility in Filing Written Statements - Courts recognize that delays in filing written statements can be excused if the defendant demonstrates a sufficient cause, which is interpreted as a valid reason beyond mere neglect. For instance, litigations or procedural issues can constitute sufficient cause, and courts have allowed filing of written statements even after the prescribed period, often with costs or conditions BANK OF BARODA VS PIONEER GLOBEX PRIVATE LIMITED - Gujarat, BANK OF BARODA VS PIONEER GLOBEX PRIVATE LIMITED - Gujarat, Sunita Devi VS Republic Tractor Motor Pvt. Ltd. - Jharkhand, SALIM HAMEED vs A THITHUMMA - Kerala.
-
Effect of Filing Vakalatnama Alone - Filing a Vakalatnama indicates appearance but does not substitute for a written statement. Courts have clarified that the absence of a written statement, despite appearance through counsel, does not automatically lead to ex parte orders or case remand unless the court is convinced that there was wilful default or no intention to defend Karan Kumar VS Rajinder Kumar Gupta - Jammu and Kashmir, SALIM HAMEED vs A THITHUMMA - Kerala.
-
Court Discretion and Procedural Flexibility - Courts have shown discretion in handling delays or non-filing of written statements, often allowing belated filings with costs or other conditions, especially when the defendant has appeared and shown an intention to contest the matter Sunita Devi VS Republic Tractor Motor Pvt. Ltd. - Jharkhand, Simi Salim VS Tip Top Furniture Industries - Kerala.
Analysis and Conclusion:
Filing a Vakalatnama alone does not entitle the court to dismiss or remand a case solely on the basis of non-filing of a written statement. Courts prioritize the defendant's appearance and the presence of a sufficient cause for delay or non-compliance. Generally, if the defendant appears through counsel, courts tend to provide opportunities to file written statements, even belatedly, and avoid harsh consequences like ex parte orders or remand, emphasizing procedural fairness and substantive justice.
Search Results for "No Remand when Appearance Vakalatnama of Defendant is Filed but did Not File Written Statement"
2018 0 Supreme(Guj) 1219 • India - Gujarat
MOHINDER PAL, A.C.RAO
However, though the matter was adjourned, the respondent Nos.1 to 7 neither filed their appearance, nor filed or written statement ... No.414 of 2017 and the respondent Nos.1 to 7 appeared through an Advocate and filed undertaking to file and written statement on ... –Held Sufficient cause is the cause for which defendant could not be blamed for his absence. ... However, though the matter was adjo....
2018 0 Supreme(Guj) 1222 • India - Gujarat
MOHINDER PAL, A.C.RAO
and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 – Section 22(2)(g) – Ex-parte order – Challenge as to – Sufficient cause is cause for which defendant ... could not be blamed for his absence – Meaning of word “sufficient” is “adequate” or “enough”, inasmuch as may be necessary to answer ... prevented by any “sufficient cause” from prosecuting his case, and unless a satisfactory explanation is furnished, Court should not ... However, though the matter was adjourned on 08/08/2017 and 20/9/2017, the respondent Nos.1 to 7 neither filed ....
2021 0 Supreme(Jhk) 212 • India - Jharkhand
RAJESH SHANKAR
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 ... Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners should be allowed to file written statements after being debarred for not ... It allowed the petitioners to file written statements subject to payment of cost to the plaintiff to compensate for the delay. ... The defenda....
1998 0 Supreme(Guj) 428 • India - Gujarat
S.K.KESHOTE
but he has not filed written statement, nor has he done anything in the suit except simply putting appearance. ... the matter with direction to file written statement and to proceed with the suit by giving ample opportunity of the hearing - No ... his appearance long back, and he should not have waited for withdrawal of his appearance till the suit was permitted to reach to ... From the proceedin....
2003 0 Supreme(AP) 249 • India - Andhra Pradesh
P.S.NARAYANA
a Counsel and asked for time for filing written statement but due to certain litigations at he could not contract Advocate for drafting ... written statement on and consequently he was called absent and set ex parte and a decree was passed – Held, court of considered ... suit for recovery of amount on strength a mortgage and it stated in affidavit that appellant herein defendant in suit appeared through ... It was further stated that the default is not wilful and that....
1998 0 Supreme(J&K) 54 • India - Jammu and Kashmir
A.K.GOEL
Advocate appearing on behalf of defendant but not filing vakalamama. ... Later on defendant took a stand that said advocate was not engaged by him. ... V- Rules 12 and 16 Summons accepted by defendant and signature on the back of summons are similar to that on Sale Deed and Receipt ... Record of the case shows that defendant did not file any written statement during the course of trial of the suit in the court belo....
2016 Supreme(Online)(KER) 26123 • India - High Court of Kerala
K.ABRAHAM MATHEW, J
Final Decision: The petitioners' original petition is dismissed; they may file a proper additional written statement within ... actions on jurisdiction and the handling of written statements. ... initiated a suit despite being labeled as an interlocutory application, emphasizing jurisdiction rules and the proper handling of written ... After the remand, the petitioners filed Ext P6 'written statement' along with E....
2016 0 Supreme(Ker) 380 • India - Kerala
K.ABRAHAM MATHEW
The Vacation Judge was wrong in giving the written statement filed by the petitioners to respondents 1 to 3 ... by a party alone can be returned to him or not - Held, Order VII Rule 10 C.P.C empowers the court to return the plaint only. ... The proceedings filed by a party alone can be returned to him; the proceedings filed by another party cannot be returned to him. ... The petitioners in this O.P. who are defendants 1 and 2, entered appearance and....
2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 26243 • India - High Court of Madras
M.Sundar, K.Govindarajan Thilakavati, JJ
statements - The court noted that the written statement was filed within the stipulated time and that the defendant's right to cross-examine ... that the defendant had not been served properly, thus setting aside the ex parte order and remanding the case for trial on merits ... statement within the permissible period - Court emphasized that timelines under the Act must be strictly adhered to and acknowledged ... As directed by this Court on 05.04.2024, the ....
2024 0 Supreme(Mad) 2228 • India - Madras
M. SUNDAR, K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI
for trademark infringement, and the defendant was set ex parte due to the claim that they had not filed a written statement. ... However, the defendant had e-filed their written statement within the prescribed time. ... if the written statement is filed within the allowed time. ... As directed by this Court on 05.04.2024, the defendant has not....
Filter by Legal Phrase
