Madhya Pradesh High Court
Narmada Associate Through Partner ... vs Smt. Kiran Bilthariya on 16 April, 2025
Author: Dwarka Dhish Bansal
Bench: Dwarka Dhish Bansal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:17707
1 MP-1745-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
ON THE 16 th OF APRIL, 2025
MISC. PETITION No. 1745 of 2025
NARMADA ASSOCIATE THROUGH PARTNER ABHISHEK PANDEY AND
OTHERS
Versus
SMT. KIRAN BILTHARIYA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri R.P. Khare - Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Lokesh Jain - Panel Lawyer for respondents 16, 17 & 18/State.
ORDER
This misc. petition has been preferred by the petitioners/defendants 4-6
challenging the order dated 27.02.2025 passed by 20th Civil Judge Junior
Division, Jabalpur, in Civil Suit No.1134-A/2019 whereby petitioners/defendants
4-6's application under Section 151 CPC for taking written statement on record,
has been dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that although due to non
filing of written statement within a period of 90 days, right of the petitioners to file
written statement was closed on 27.04.2023, but immediately thereafter on the
next date i.e. 08.05.2023, the petitioners filed written statement along with
application under Section 151 CPC with the prayer for taking the same on record,
which even in absence of opposition of the plaintiffs, has been dismissed. He
submits that as the suit is at its preliminary stage and issues have not been framed
yet, therefore, if the written statement already filed by the petitioners is taken on
record, no prejudice would be caused to the plaintiffs. In support of his
submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on a decision of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:17707
2 MP-1745-2025
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Kalra vs. Raj Kishan Chabra 2022
SCC OnLine SC 613 and prays for allowing the miscellaneous petition.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.
4. Apparently, right of the petitioners to file written statement was closed
vide order dated 27.04.2023 and the petitioners filed written statement on
08.05.2023 along with application under Section 151 of CPC with the prayer for
taking the same on record and impugned order dated 27.02.2025 shows that the
application was not even replied by plaintiffs and trial Court has on the premise
that as the right of the petitioners to file written statement has already been closed
on 27.04.2023, held that the application cannot be allowed and dismissed the
same.
5. In the case of Bharat Kalra (supra) , Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as
under :-
"1. Leave granted.
2. The challenge in the present appeal is to an order passed
by the High Court on 12.08.2021 whereby delay of 193 days
in filing of the written statement was not condoned.
3. Admittedly, the suit for injunction filed by the plaintiff is
not the one which is governed by the Commercial Court Act,
2015. Therefore, the time limit for filing of the written
statement under Order VIII Rule 1 of CPC is not mandatory
in view of the judgment of this Court reported as 'Kailash V.
Nankhu & Ors.' reported in (2005) 4 SCC 480.
4. In view of the aforesaid judgment, we find that the delay
in filing of the written statement could very well be
compensated with costs but denying the benefit of filing of
the written statement is unreasonable.
5. Consequently, we allow the present appeal. The order
passed by the High Court is set aside. The written statement
already filed is taken on record.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:17707
3 MP-1745-2025
6. We do hope that the trial Court shall expedite the
decision of the suit keeping in view the old age of the
plaintiff.
7. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of."
6. From the impugned order, it is clear that the suit is at its preliminary
stage and the Court has fixed the case for consideration of application under Order
39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC, therefore and in view of the fact that no opposition was there
on behalf plaintiffs to the application under Section 151 of CPC, the impugned
order deserves to be and is hereby set aside.
7. Resultantly, application under Section 151 of CPC stands allowed with
cost of Rs.5,000/- payable to the plaintiffs on the next date fixed before trial Court
and written statement filed by petitioners/defendants 4-6 is directed to be taken on
record, with the further direction to trial Court to proceed further with the suit in
accordance with the law.
8. Accordingly, this misc. petition is allowed and disposed off .
9. Misc. application(s), pending if any, shall stand closed.
(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL)
JUDGE
SN
