IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
C.R. No.390 of 2006
RAM SWAROOP YADAV & ORS
Versus
CHANDRA DEO MAHTO & ORS
-----------
13 1.7.2008 Heard Counsel for the petitioners. No one appears on
behalf of the opposite parties despite service of notices
effected against all of them.
The defendant petitioners are aggrieved by an order
dated 5.12.2005 rejecting the prayer of the petitioners to
accept their written statement.
Counsel for the petitioners submits that as the plaint
required verification of a large number of documents as
mentioned in paragraph no.5 of the civil revision application,
the petitioners being the defendants to the suit could not
have filed a written statement without obtaining their copy or
at least making an enquiry about them. It has then been
contended that though they had appeared in the Court below
on 26.11.2002 but their written statement could be filed only
on 10.3.2005.
Normally for any document on which plaintiff sues, the
defendants are not required to postpone or delay the filing of
the written statement in view of the provision made in order
7 rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure. But, then as the
written statement is the most important part of the pleading
and has to be filed by the defendant after properly examining
2
the averments in the plaint and if the plaint had referred to
as many as forty cases, such reason of making enquiry about
by them leading to some delay in filing of written statement
is by itself a sufficient cause condonable within the ambit of
order VIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure as held by
the Apex Court in the case of Kailash Vs. Nanhku reported in
A.I.R. 2005 S.C. 2441.
Considering the aforesaid ratio of the Apex Court as
also taking into consideration the facts of the present case,
this Court would hold that the mechanic and pedantic
approach of the court bellow in rejecting the written
statement of defendant of this petitioners suffers from the
vice of jurisdictional error and consequently the impugned
order is set aside. This court would accordingly direct the
court below to accept the written statement filed by the
petitioners on payment of Rupees 2500/- by way of cost to
plaintiff opposite parties to compensates the plaintiff for the
delay and inconvenience cause to them.
The Court below will make all efforts to dispose of the
suit expeditiously. In the result this Civil Revision
Application is allowed with the aforesaid observations and
directions.
Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)