ROHIT MITTAL Vs. SIKHA AGGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Summons in CS 605/2018 (Shikha Aggarwal v. Rohit Mittal) were served on the petitioner, who was the defendant in the said suit, before the learned Additional District Judge ("the learned ADJ") on 27/8/2018. Written statement was, therefore, required to be filed within 30 days, condonable upto maximum of 90 days from the date of service of summons, as per Order VIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC).

(2.) Written statement came to be filed by the petitioner on 30/11/2018, i.e. 4 days beyond the maximum period of 90 days. The ground urged for taking the written statement on record, despite having been filed beyond the maximum condonable period envisaged in Order VIII Rule 1 of the CPC, was that the petitioner's father was seriously ill and had to be regularly subjected to dialysis, owing to which reason the petitioner was not in a position to devote time to the case.

(3.) By order dtd. 12/12/2018, the aforesaid application of the petitioner, under Order VIII Rule 1 of the CPC, was dismissed by the learned ADJ, holding that no documentary proof, regarding illness of the petitioner's father, had been placed on record. It was further observed that it was settled law that illness of the parties or their parents was no ground to condone delay.