A SATHYAPAL Vs. YASMIN BANU ANSARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DIVERGENT opinions expressed by different single benches of this Court have necessitated the present reference to a larger bench to resolve the conflict and the resultant confusion as regards the true and correct interpretation of Order VIII, Rules 1 and 9 of the cpc. The precise question that falls for consideration is whether a Court trying a civil action has the power to extend time for filing of a written statement beyond what is stipulated in Order VIII, Rule 1 of the Code. The question arises In the following backdrop.

(2.) IN S. G. Narayana Swamy v. Rama-krishnappa ILR 2003 Kant 2205 : AIR 2003 kant 378 : (2003 AIR Kant HCR 2020), K. Sreedhar Rao, J. , while interpreting Order viii, Rules 1, 9 and 10 held that unbridled discretion to grant extension to file written statement stood curtailed by the amended provisions. If the defendant in a suit does not file a written statement within the time stipulated under Order VIII, Rule 1, he can for valid reasons seek condonation of the delay in doing so. The Court can in such situation exercise its inherent power and condone the lapse and admit the written statement belatedly while compensating the opposite party for the inconvenience caused to it by awarding costs punitive or otherwise to discharge what the Court described "misuse or the abuse of the provisions". A rigid or technical view on the interpretation of the provision will, observed his Lordship, result in multiplicity of avoidable "off shoot proceedings" like an appeal against the decree.

(3.) G. C. Bharuka, J. in Smt. Savitha gupta v. Smt. Nagarathna (2003) 4 Kant LJ 14 : AIR 2003 Kant 426 : (2003 AIR Kant hcr 2028) expressed a contrary view. His lordship held that from the amended provisions of Order 8, Rule 1 of the Code of civil Procedure, it was evident that a defendant loses his right to file a written statement if he fails to do so within the time prescribed by the said provision. The Court has no power declared his Lordship to extend such time even u/s. 148 or 151 of the CPC.