Madras High Court
Selvam @ Selvaraj vs P. Ashok on 6 September, 2021
C.R.P.(PD)No.1803 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06.09.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN
C.R.P.(PD). No.1803 of 2021
and C.M.P.No.14014 of 2021
(Through Video Conference)
1. Selvam @ Selvaraj
2. Velmurugan ...Petitioners
Versus
P. Ashok ...Respondent
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution
of India to set aside the fair and final order passed in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in
O.S.No.657 of 2012 in dated 04.03.2021 pending on the file of the Principal
District Munsif at Salem.
For Petitioners : M/s.N.Umapathi
******
O RD E R
This Civil Revision Petition is filed to set aside the order passed in
I.A.No.1 of 2020 in O.S.No.657 of 2012 by the learned Principal District
Munsif at Salem on 04.03.2021 .
________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.R.P.(PD)No.1803 of 2021
2. I.A.No.1 of 2020 was filed by the respondent / second defendant under
Order VIII Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Code to receive the additional written
statement.
3. It is alleged that the suit was originally filed for the relief of permanent
injunction and the plaint was subsequently amended for mandatory injunction.
The respondent has not raised any defense with regard to the claim of
mandatory injunction inadvertently. Therefore, he had to file additional written
statement challenging the prayer with regard to the mandatory injunction.
4. This petition was contested by the petitioners alleging that this petition
is filed without stating any reason for delay in filing the additional written
statement. The examination of the witnesses have been concluded and the case
was reserved for judgment. This matter was posted for judgment on 09.12.2019,
13.01.2020, 29.01.2020, 31.01.2020 and 12.02.2020. This petition is filed only
to introduce the new theory and to fill up the lacuna. Therefore, the petitioner
prayed for the dismissal of the petition.
5. The learned Principal District Munsif, Salem, after considering the
rival submissions allowed the petition. Against the said order, this Civil
Revision Petition is preferred.
________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.R.P.(PD)No.1803 of 2021
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners reiterated the averments made
in the counter filed for the petitioner to receive additional written statement
and submitted that no reason was stated for the delay in filing the additional
written statement and the petition was filed, when the case is pending for
judgment, only to fill up the lacuna and to introduce a new theory.
7. As pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners that this suit
was filed for the relief of permanent injunction and subsequently, the plaint
was amended for including the prayer for mandatory injunction. The written
statement was filed only after the amendment was carried out. It is expected
that the respondent should have filed the written statement by including his
defense, with regard to the claim of mandatory injunction. That was not done. It
is claimed by the respondent that by inadvertence, the claim with regard to
mandatory injunction was not raised in the written statement and therefore, the
additional written statement has to be filed.
8. This petition is primarily allowed for the reason that the respondent
should be given an opportunity to raise his defense with regard to the
mandatory injunction. Unlike amendment of plaint, the rules with regard to
amendment of written statement and filing of subsequent pleadings is liberal.
________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.R.P.(PD)No.1803 of 2021
This has already been decided by the Hon'ble Apex Court for rendering
substantial justice to the parties. The parties must be given fair and reasonable
opportunity before the Trial Court. If that opportunity is denied on technical
grounds of delay, the parties may not get their right decided appropriately and it
would occasion the failure of justice.
9. In this view of the matter and the reasons stated by the respondent that
due to inadvertence, the respondent has not raised his defense on the plea of
mandatory injunction, this Court is of the view that the respondent may be
permitted to file the additional written statement. The learned Principal District
Munsif, Salem, also considered this aspect and allowed this petition. This Court
does not want to interfere with the order of the learned Principal District
Munsif, Salem, for the aforesaid reasons and confirms the order of the learned
Principal District Munsif, Salem. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is
Dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
10. However, considering the fact that the suit is of the year 2012 and the
case was pending for pronouncing judgment when this petition for receiving
additional written statement was filed, the learned Principal District Munsif,
________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.R.P.(PD)No.1803 of 2021
Salem is directed to receive the additional written statement and give
opportunity to the petitioner to file reply statement, if any, frame appropriate
issues, record evidence, if any, and dispose the suit as expeditiously as possible,
preferably within a period of two(02) months from the date of receipt of this
order copy.
06.09.2021
Index: Yes/ No
Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order
sts/jai
To:
The Principal District Munsif,
Salem.
________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.R.P.(PD)No.1803 of 2021
G.CHANDRASEKHARAN, J.,
sts/jai
Order made in
C.R.P.(PD).No.1803 of 2021
Dated:
06.09.2019
________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
