Rajasthan High Court
Manju Saini D/O Late Shri Moti Lal vs Shri Digambar Jain Mandir- Vaidan on 7 April, 2022
Bench: Ashok Kumar Gaur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 25272/2018
Manju Saini D/o Late Shri Moti Lal, Aged About 55 Years, R/o
House No. 254, Shri Digambar Jain Mandir Vaidan, Maniram Ji Ki
Kothi, Ramganj Bazar, Jaipur (Rajasthan)
----Petitioner
Versus
Shri Digambar Jain Mandir- Vaidan, House No. 254, Maniram Ji
Ki Kothi, Ramganj Bazar, Jaipur Through Manager, Suresh Vaid
S/o Late Shri Kistur Chand Ji Vaid Jaipur (Rajasthan)
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Shyam Lal Sharma, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr.Mahesh Gupta, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR
Order
07/04/2022
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging
the order dated 04.10.2018, whereby the Court below has refused
to take written statement on record as the same was filed beyond
the period of 90 days.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner had engaged a lawyer to appear in the Civil Court after
receipt of notices and as such Vakalatnama was filed on her behalf
on 09.01.2018.
Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner moved an
application to provide copy of document (Map), which was not
annexed with the suit and finally the same was supplied to the
petitioner on 05.04.2018.
(2 of 3) [CW-25272/2018]
Learned counsel submitted that after 05.04.2018, the next
date was fixed on 24.05.2018 and counsel for the petitioner could
not file the written statement due to unavoidable circumstances
and on the next date i.e. on 04.07.2018, the Court below has
refused to take the written statement on record.
Learned counsel submitted that there has been no intention
of delaying the said proceedings and the period prescribed under
Order 8 Rule 1 CPC of filing written statement is only directory and
if the sufficient reasons are given before the Court below, the
Court can permit filing of written statement even after the period
of 90 days.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on a
judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Desh Raj Vs.
Balkishan (Dead) through Proposed Legal Representative
Ms. Rohini reported in (2020) 2 SCC 708.
Learned counsel on the strength of the said judgment
submitted that timeline of filing written statement in non-
commercial matter is directory and as such this Court in the
interest of justice may grant one opportunity to the petitioner to
file written statement.
Learned counsel Mr.Mahesh Gupta, appearing on behalf of
the respondents, has opposed the prayer made by learned counsel
for the petitioner in the present writ petition.
Learned counsel submitted that the Court below has rightly
refused to take written statement on record and the petitioner was
required to file written statement within a period of 90 days from
the date of service.
Learned counsel submitted that the non-petitioner, who has
filed the suit for eviction of petitioner will be deprived of right to
(3 of 3) [CW-25272/2018]
get the possession if the petitioner intends to delay the
proceedings.
This Court finds that in normal course, the defendant is
required to file written statement within a period of 90 days after
receipt of the summons to appear before the Court, however, if
the proper explanation is given to the Court, the Court after
considering the entire facts, can extend the time of filing of
written statement and the provision contained in Order 8 Rule 1
CPC has not been held to be mandatory by the Apex Court expect
in cases of commercial nature.
This Court finds that in the present case, initially the
petitioner faced difficulty in not getting the complete papers
along-with the map, which was filed by the non-petitioner later on
and she being a lady was not able to collect the relevant facts for
providing it to her lawyer to file written statement.
This Court in view of the judgment passed by the Apex Court
finds that interest of justice would be served if the petitioner is
granted one more opportunity to file her written statement on the
next date of hearing. The petitioner would be required to pay cost
of Rs.5,000/- to non-petitioner on the next date, which is already
fixed before the Court below.
Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of, with
a direction to the petitioner to file written statement on the next
date of hearing with a cost of Rs.5,000/- before the Court below.
The orders passed by the Court below dated 04.07.2018 &
04.10.2018, are quashed and set aside.
(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J
Monika/53
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
