Allowed

Prabhakar Bhiva Patil v. Shridhar Dattatray Bapat

Bombay HC26 Feb 2008WP/2415/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking setting aside of an order rejecting the petitioner's application to set aside a 'No Written Statement' order. Court allowed the petition and set aside the impugned order, allowing a new two-week window to file the written statement.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 6.3.2007 set aside; application at Exhibit-24 allowed; petitioner given two weeks to file written statement; cost of Rs.3000 allowed to be withdrawn.

Prabhakar Bhiva Patil Vs Shridhar Dattatray… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2008)

¶1

-1-

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.2415 OF 2007

¶4

 Prabhakar Bhiva Patil, .. Petitioner.
 Vs
 Shridhar Dattatray Bapat, .. Respondent.

¶5

 Mr R.L.Majgaonkar, for the petitioner.
 Mr V.P. Dhavale, for the respondent.

¶6

CORAM : D.B.Bhosale,J.
DATE : 26.02.08.

¶7

PC:

¶8

 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶9

 . Rule. Mr.Dhavale, learned counsel, waives
 service for the respondents. By consent, rule is made
 returnable forthwith and heard finally.

¶10

 2. This petition is directed against an order dated

¶11

 6.3.2007 passed by the trial Court rejecting the
 application at Exhibit-24 in Regular Civil Suit No.14 of
 2006. The application at Exhibit-24 was filed by the
 petitioner for setting aside "NO WS" order. Admittedly,
 there was a delay of 163 days. Though, prima face, I do
 not find any fault with the observations made by the
 learned Judge, in order to give one more chance to the
 petitioner I am inclined to allow this writ petition. I
 am satisfied that the petitioner did not stand to
 benefit by not filing written statement within the time

¶12

-2-

¶13

 stipulated under Order VIII, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil
 Procedure. In the present case, there is an interim
 order running against the petitioner. Learned counsel
 for the parties fairly stated that I need not record
 long reasons for disposing of this petition and they
 have agreed for the following order.

¶14

 . The impugned order dated 6.3.2007 is set aside.
 The application at Exhibit-24 is allowed. If the
 petitioner has not filed Written Statement so far he is
 allowed to file it within a period of two weeks from
 today, failing which the trial Court shall proceed with
 the hearing of the suit without Written Statement. The
 cost of Rs.3000/- deposited by the petitioner pursuant
 to an order dated 9.4.2007 is allowed to be withdrawn by
 the respondents. The trial Court shall endeavour to
 dispose of the suit on merits in accordance with law
 expeditiously. The writ petition is disposed of.

¶15

 (D.B.Bhosale,J.)

Prabhakar Bhiva Patil v. Shridhar Dattatray Bapat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabhakar Bhiva Patil v. Shridhar Dattatray Bapat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. B. B. Paul and Ors. Vs Lalitkumar Dwarkadas Chapsey and Ors.

The Kolhapur Maratha Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs Balkrushna Babaso Pawar-Medhe and Ors.

Veena Dushyant Malgonkar Vs Vimlaben Gosalia and Anr.

Popat Rajaram Mote and Anr. Vs Ravichandra Madhav Awachat and Ors.

Iyer Balakrishna Hariharan Vs South Indian Co-Op.Bank Ltd. and Ors.

Ratan Devram Pagar and Anr. Vs Sitabai Gangadhar Pagar and Ors.