Gujarat High Court
Karjan Cotton Sale Ginning And ... vs Narendrakumar Himmatlall ... on 14 September, 2023
Bench: J. C. Doshi
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/13153/2017 ORDER DATED: 14/09/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13153 of 2017
==========================================================
KARJAN COTTON SALE GINNING AND PRESSING SOCIETY LTD.
Versus
NARENDRAKUMAR HIMMATLALL THAKKAR
==========================================================
Appearance:
ROHAN A SHAH(7497) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
RUSHABH H SHAH(7594) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
CHINTAN K GANDHI(8600) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
KETULKUMAR V PATEL(10121) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 14/09/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr. Rohan Shah, learned advocate for the petitioner and
Mr. Chintan Gandhi, learned advocate for the respondent No.1
2. In this petition, the order passed below Exh. 24 in Special
Civil Suit No. 601 of 2013 is challenged by which the Court below
denied the permission to defendant to file written statement because
the period of limitation of filing written statement is expired.
3. Mr. Rohan Shah, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner
submits that the draft written statement is produced on record at
Annexure "C". He would submit that the draft written statement was
ready to be filed on 25.7.2014. However, for the reasons that the suit
was transferred to one Court to another Court, the defendant could
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/13153/2017 ORDER DATED: 14/09/2023
undefined
not trace out the pending suit. He would further submit that in view
of provision of order 8 Rule 1 of CPC by catena of the judgment of
the Hon'ble Apex Court,the Court can its discretionary power to
condone the delay and accept the written statement. Therefore, he
would submit that to allow this petition.
4. On the otherside, Mr. Chintan Gandhi,learned advocate for the
respondent submits that no reasons are stated in Exh. 24 seeking
condonation of delay application for filing the written statement
within prescribe period of limitation. Upon such submission, he
would further submit that to dismiss this petition.
5. What appears from the record that suit was not traceable for a
long time. It further appears that written statement was ready. The
affidavit supporting the written statement was also ready, but since
the suit was not traceable, the written statement could not be filed. In
the case in hand, if the defendant is permitted to allow to file the
written statement and contest the suit on merit, with order of the
cost, it would not cause any prejudice to the plaintiff. On the
contrary, it would allow the dispute to be decided on merit.
6. In peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this petition is
allowed. The order dated 3.5.2017 passed by the learned 4 th
Additional Civil Judge, Vadodara in Special Civil Suit No. 601 of
2013 is hereby quashed and set aside. Provided that the petitioner
shall deposit Rs.5,000/- towards the cost before the Court below
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/13153/2017 ORDER DATED: 14/09/2023
undefined
within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order.
7. The age of the suit is of the year 2013 demanding the
expeditious hearing of the suit. The learned trial Court to make an
endeavour to decide and dispose of the aforementioned suit pending
before it as earlier as possible, keeping in mind the pendency of the
matters before it.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
BEENA SHAH
