Dismissed

Bhagirath Mali v. Ladulal

Rajasthan HC2 Jan 2023CW/8676/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the trial court's refusal to close a delayed written statement. The Court held that since the respondent had filed the written statement and was penalized with costs, Article 227 interference to scrap it was not warranted.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as there was no substance in the plea to interfere with the trial court's order.

Bhagirath Mali Vs Ladulal — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8676/2022

¶3

Bhagirath Mali S/o Shri Suwalal, Aged About 49 Years, Resident of Mali Mohalla Hurda, P.s. Gulabpura, Dist.- Bhilwara.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Ladulal S/o Shri Harlal, Resident Of Hurda, Tehsil- Hurda, District- Bhilwara.

¶7

Raghunath S/o Shri Ladulal, Resident Of Hurda, TehsilHurda, District- Bhilwara.

¶8

Kalu S/o Shri Ladulal, B/c Mali, Resident Of Hurda, TehsilHurda, District- Bhilwara.

¶9

Sanwarlal S/o Shri Ladulal, Resident Of Hurda, TehsilHurda, District- Bhilwara.

¶10

Bherulal S/o Shri Harlal, Resident Of Hurda, TehsilHurda, District- Bhilwara.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Swaroop Singh Sisodia. Mr. Jaipal Singh. For Respondent(s) :

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Order

¶14

02/01/2023

¶15

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against order dated 29.3.2022, wherein the application filed by the petitioner under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC seeking to close the written statement of the respondent/defendant has been dismissed.

¶16

The application was filed by the petitioner pointing out that despite the time indicated in the Order VIII Rule 1 CPC, the written statement has not been filed and, therefore, the same be closed.

¶17

When the application came up for consideration before the Court, the Court noticed that written statement had been filed by the defendant, though after 15 days of filing of the application by

¶18

(2 of 2) [CW-8676/2022]

¶19

the plaintiff and, therefore, ordered for payment of cost of Rs.500/- to the plaintiff and rejected the application filed by the plaintiff.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions that the learned trial court was not justified in rejecting the application as admittedly, the written statement has been filed after the time stipulated under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC.

¶21

Even when the application was filed by the petitioner, the written statement was filed after 15 days of filing of the application and, therefore, the order passed ordering for payment of cost and rejecting the application deserves interference by this Court.

¶22

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the material available on record.

¶23

The provisions of Order VIII Rule 1 CPC has been held to be directory by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Salem Advocate Bar Association Vs. Union of India : AIR 2005 SC 3353 .

¶24

In the present case, once the written statement has already come on record and the petitioner has been compensated by way of cost by passing the order impugned by the trial Court, no case for interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India so as to scrap the written statement, which has already come on record and to order proceeding of the matter ex-parte can be passed.

¶25

In view of the above, there is no substance in the petition, the same is, therefore, dismissed.

¶26

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

¶27

8-sumer/-

Bhagirath Mali v. Ladulal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhagirath Mali v. Ladulal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashish Chaubey Vs State of Rajasthan

Parasmal Vs State of Rajasthan

Banshiram Vs State of Rajasthan

Vikaram Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Priyanka Modi Vs State of Rajasthan

Suresh Kumar Mewara Vs State of Rajasthan