Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 9723 MP
Judgement Date : 27 June, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
ON THE 27 th OF JUNE, 2023
MISC. PETITION No. 1900 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SENIOR DIVISIONAL
ENGINEER (SOUTH) DRM OFFICE WESTERN RAILWAY
RATLAM (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI ASHUTOSH SHARMA - ADVOCATE)
AND
SETH MOHANLAL HIRALAL CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY THROUGH PARTNER PRAMOD AGARWAL
DWARKA HOUSE STATION ROAD ITARSI (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI AJAY JAIN - ADVOCATE)
This petition coming on for orders this day, the court passed the following:
ORDER
With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.
The present petition is filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 20.09.2022 passed by the Commercial Court, Indore whereby, the right of the petitioner to file W.S. has been forfieted and the W.S has not been taken on record.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the summon was received by the petitioners on 08.05.2022 and they could have filed W.S with the permission of the court till 14.09.2022 but they could not file the W.S. within 30 days. However, the trial court has forfieted their right to file W.S. and did not Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 27/06/2023 5:51:27 PM
accept the W.S. on record on the ground that the W.S. was not filed within the period prescribed under Order 8 Rule 1 of CPC. It is further submitted that the aforesaid provisions are directory in nature. He relies on the judgment by the Supreme Court in the case of R.N.Jadi & Brothers And Others Vs. Subhashchandra (2007) 6 SCC 420, and Mohammed Yusuf Vs. Faij Mohammad and Others (2009) 3 SCC 513.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the different view has been taken by the Supreme Court in the case of M/s. SCG Contracts India Pvt. Lts Vs. K.S Chamankar Infrastruture Pvt. Ltd and Ors reported in 2019 (12) SCC 2020. However, the parties agreed that instead of deciding the
legal issue on the said point, the petition may be disposed off directing the trial court to accept the W.S. filed by the petitioners subject to payment of cost.
4. I am of the considered view that the petitioner be given one more opportunity in the interest of justice and the WS which has already been filed in the suit be taken on record subject to payment of cost to the counsel for the respondent.
5. The present petition is disposed off with a direction to the petitioner to file WS if not already filed on the next date without seeking any further adjournment subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- to the respondent.
6. It is made clear that the legal issue raised by the parties in the present case has not been decided by this court.The petition is disposed off with the consent of the parties without adverting to the legal issue.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE Sourabh Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 27/06/2023 5:51:27 PM
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 27/06/2023 5:51:27 PM
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!