High Court exercised supervisory powers under Article 227 to dismiss a writ petition challenging the trial court's acceptance of a delayed written statement, holding that the imposed cost adequately compensated the plaintiffs for the inconvenience caused.
The writ petition was dismissed and the trial court's order was allowed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 36
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 9486 of 2018
Petitioner :- Sri Vikram Jain And 2 Others Respondent :- Rishabh Kumar Jain And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Madan Mohan Jain
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record.
The order of the trial court in accepting written statement on a payment of cost of Rs. 600/- is being challenged in this petition on the ground that no plausible reason has been offered by the defendant for filing the written statement with delay.
Having perused the order-sheet of Original Suit No.198 of 2016, this Court does not find any reason to invoke its extraordinary supervisory power under Article 227 of Constitution of India to interfere in the decision taken by the trial court in accepting the written statement. The inconvenience caused to the plaintiffs/petitioners has been compensated with the cost as is imposed by the trial court.
The present petition is dismissed, accordingly.
Order Date :- 8.2.2019 Radhika
2 issues framed by the court
Whether Article 227 of the Constitution of India warrants interference with the trial court's decision to accept a late written statement.
Whether the cost imposed by the trial court adequately compensates the inconvenience caused to plaintiffs due to delay.
Sri Vikram Jain And 2 Others
Rishabh Kumar Jain And 3 Others
Sunita Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
