Page No.# 1/3 vs Pobitra Das
2023 Latest Caselaw 1628 Gua

                                                                    Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010270032022




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                 Case No. : CRP(IO)/6/2023

            BLACK SHORT INDIA LIMITED AND ANR
            HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 406, 4TH FLOOR, MGF METROPOLIS MALL, NEAR
            MG ROAD METRO STATION, GURUGRAM, HARYANA-122002 THROUGH
            ITS COO AND AUTHORIZED PERSON RAJEEV KUMAR

            2: RAJEEV KUMAR
             COO OF BLACK SHORT INDIA LIMITED HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 406
             4TH FLOOR
             MGF METROPOLIS MALL
             NEAR MG ROAD METRO STATION
             GURUGRAM
             HARYANA-12200

            VERSUS

            POBITRA DAS
            S/O PRAFULLA DAS, PROPRIETOR OF M/S PAWAN PUTRA ENTERPRISES,
            C/O PRABHAT CHANDRA DAS, VILL-KHARGULI, JOYPUR, HOUSE NO. A52,
            NEAR JAYANTA MADHAB, P.S.-LATASIL, GUWAHATI, KAMRUPM (M),
            ASSAM, PIN-781004



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR A DEKA

Advocate for the Respondent : MS S DAS
                                                                       Page No.# 2/3




                                BEFORE
               HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

                                    ORDER

26.04.2023

Heard Mr. S. Deori, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S. Das, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. The present application is filed assailing an order dated 03.12.2022 passed by the learned Court of Civil Judge No. 2, Kamrup (M), Guwahati in M.S. No. 92/2021, whereby the application filed by the defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P.C. was rejected as well as the defendant was not allowed to file written statement as the period mandated under Order 8 Rule 1 and 10 of the CPC, was over in the meantime.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petition was filed under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC, however, he may be granted some time to file written statement as the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the provision of Order 8 Rule 1 and 10 of the CPC is not a mandatory one.

4. Countering such argument, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that in view of the recent judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Scg Contracts India Pvt. Ltd -Vs- Ks Chamankar Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. reported in AIR 2019 SC 2691, the Courts are not having any power to extend time to file written statement beyond 120 days. In the case in hand, already 321 days has been passed.

5. Mr. Deuri, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be given Page No.# 3/3

some time to go through the aforesaid judgment and reply to such submission. Prayer is allowed.

6. List this matter on 12.05.2023.

7. Interim order passed earlier shall continue till the next date of listing.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant