CHANDRAKALA Vs. HANUMAKKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 7th defendant filed the present writ petition to quash the impugned order dated 18.7.2017 on I.A. No.4 made in O.S. No.1178/2002 on the file of the Prl. Senior Civil Judge, Bangalore rural district, Bangalore, dismissing the application filed under Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure for permission to file the written statement after lapse of 14 years.

(2.) The Respondent Nos.1 and 2 who are the plaintiffs before the trial Court filed the suit for partition and separate possession in respect of the suit schedule property contending that the plaintiffs and defendant Nos.1 and 2 constitute Hindu undivided family and they have been in joint possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. It was also contended that there was no partition in the joint family and therefore filed the suit for the relief sought for. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, none of the defendants filed any written statement.

(3.) After the issues were framed, when the matter was posted for evidence, at that stage, 7th defendant filed an application under Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure to permit her to file the written statement contending that she had appeared before the Court through previous counsel at the instance of defendant Nos.3 to 5 and 8 and she had executed vakalath alongwith the other defendants. The defendant Nos.3 to 5 and 8 have undertaken to inform the hearing date of the case and to proceed with the matter on her behalf also and thereafter she had forgotten the pendency of the case due to her ill-health and family problems and subsequently defendant Nos.3 and 8 have also died and their legal representatives asked her about the pendency of the case. Thereafter she came to know that her earlier counsel has filed vakalath on 4.2.2003 and no written statement was filed. Therefore the application is filed for permission to file the written statement.