M.Praveen Kumar vs Smt.M.Sheela Naidu
2021 Latest Caselaw 768 Tel

         THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

                  CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 2723 OF 2019

O R D E R:

Respondent herein filed O.S.No.174 of 2018 in the Court of

XII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Vikarabad, Ranga Reddy

District, for cancellation of the sale deed dated 21.03.2016 alleged to

have been executed by her in favour of the petitioners-defendants.

In the said suit, the petitioners filed Vakalat on 04.01.2019, but, they

did not file written statement, as such, they were set ex parte on

27.08.2019, by which time, maximum period of 90 days, as provided

for under Order VIII Rule 10 C.P.C., is also expired. Therefore, the

petitioners filed I.A.No.1155 of 2019 seeking to set aside the said

order and the same came to be dismissed on 30.10.2019 on the

ground that there was no sufficient justification for not filing the

written statement within the statutorily prescribed period or even

beyond. Hence, this Revision.

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that it is

mandatory that the written statement be filed within 90 days after

receipt of summons. He places reliance on the judgments of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in New India Assurance Company

Limited Vs. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Private Limited1 and

Mohammed Yusuf Vs. Faij Mohammad and others2 as well as the

order dated 11.03.2019 passed by this Court in C.R.P.No.6383 of

2018.

(2020) 5 SCC 757

((2009) 3 SCC 513

In the order dated 11.03.2019 in C.R.P.No.6383 of 2018, this

Court held that it is for the Court to consider whether there is a

justifiable reason for a party in not filing the written statement within

30 days or the extended period of 60 days.

A reading of the affidavit filed in support of the I.A. indicates

that the petitioners were informed that there is no Presiding Officer,

as such, they were under the impression that the matter would not

be taken up. It appears, the petitioners were wrongly advised.

However, the petitioners filed the I.A. within three weeks on coming

to know that they were set ex parte. Further, the petitioners are none

other than the sons of the respondent and substantial rights are

required to be decided in the suit.

At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners submits

that the Civil Revision Petition may be allowed by putting the

petitioners on some terms.

Hence, the order under revision is set aside and the Civil

Revision Petition is allowed with costs of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty

Thousand only) payable by the petitioners to the respondent, within

two weeks from today. I.A.No.1155 of 2019 accordingly stands

allowed. Considering the fact that the suit is of 2018, the trial Court

shall dispose it of expeditiously.

Consequently, miscellaneous applications, if any shall stand

closed.

________________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J Dt:15.03.2021

kdl