Arup Kumar Pathak Vs Dharani Dhar Nath and Anr.

2. This civil revision petition has been registered on filing of an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning the order dated 26.03.2025, passed by the Court of the learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Barpeta in Money Suit No. 13/2024, whereby the prayer of the petitioner seeking further time for filing written statement was rejected.

¶19

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is arrayed as defendant in the Money Suit No. 13/2024, which has been filed by the respondents before the Court of the learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Barpeta. He submits that the summons issued by the Trial Court were duly served on the petitioner, in spite of that he failed to submit the written statement.

¶20

4. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Trial Court also allowed the petitioner to file written statement after an extended time was granted to him, subject to payment of cost of Rs. 1,000/-. However, the petitioner failed to file the written statement even after the said order.

¶21

5. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though apparently, the impugned order does not have any legal error, however, if the petitioner is derived from filing the written statement , he would be deprived of his chances to place his case before the Trial Court.

¶22

6. He submits that he is ready to file the written statement on the next date fixed, i.e. on 14.07.2025, subject to any condition which may be

¶23

Page No.# 3/3

¶24

imposed by this Court.

¶25

7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶26

8. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court proposes to dispose of this civil revision petition without issuing notice to the respondents. Though, the Trial Court’s order does not suffer from any vice, it has rightly rejected the prayer for filing of the written statement once the petitioner had failed to file the written statement even after extended time was granted to him. However, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and for the ends of justice, one last chance is granted to the petitioner to file the written statement in Money Suit No. 13/2024, pending before the Court of the learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Barpeta on the next date fixed, i.e. on 14.07.2025, subject to payment of cost of Rs. 5,000/- in addition to the cost which has already been imposed on the petitioner by the Trial Court (Rs. 1,000/-). The payment of cost shall be condition precedent to the filing of the written statement by the petitioner, on deposit of cost by the petitioner, the same shall be given to the plaintiffs by the Trial Court.

¶27

9. With the above observations, this civil revision petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Arup Kumar Pathak v. Dharani Dhar Nath and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arup Kumar Pathak v. Dharani Dhar Nath and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Laldingliani Vs Sh Lalbiakvela (L) s/b Laldingliana and 3 Ors.

Sh. Zolianlunga and 17 Ors. Vs The State of Mizoram and 4 Ors.

Union of India and 5 Ors. Vs Sh. Hmingdailova and 4 Ors.

Sri Paramesh Mallick Vs D. G Pharma and Anr.

Guneshwar Bharali @ Guneswar Bharali Vs the State of Nagaland

Abou Sufiyan Siddique and Ors. Vs Smti. Nilima Parbin