K.P. ENTERPRISES Vs. DURG RAJNANDGAON GRAMIN BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge to the present petition is for exercising the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 and quashing the order dated 29.2.2016 passed by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Durg. The Court, below vide the impugned order has after having closed the right of Respondent No.2 in filing their written statement, had entertained an application under Section 151 CPC and allowing the same took the written statement of Respondent No.2 on record.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Court below having once closed the right of filing the written statement, could not have itself entertained a fresh application and reviewed its earlier order and directed the parties to file the written statement and contest the case on merits. According to th Petitioner, the same Court does not have the power to accept written statement having once closed the right of the party.

(3.) A perusal of the impugned order dated 29.2.2016 clearly shows that the Court below, taking into consideration the explanation submitted by Respondent No.2 of its head quarters being at Hoshiyarpur where they had sent their written statement for vetting and subsequently which was received back a bit late to be filed in the Court below located at Durg. In the process of the vetting of the written document, some delay has occurred. As such there is no mala fides on the part of Respondent No.2 in delaying the filing of the written statement and considering the reasons to be justifiable, the Court below had allowed the application under Section 151 of CPC and had taken the written statement on record and proceeded further to decide the case.