GANESH Vs. VANKETESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner/plaintiff has assailed order dtd. 11/3/2019 of the learned trial court, whereby application filed by the respondents/defendants under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC was allowed and their Written Statement was taken on record.

(2.) For past few dates, none was appearing on behalf of respondents, so vide order dtd. 27/11/2025, last opportunity was granted to respondents to join the proceedings and comparatively shorter dates were fixed keeping in mind age of the petitioner and his relation with the respondents. On 27/11/2025, it was made clear that if on the next date (18/12/2025) the respondents do not appear, matter would be decided on merits. Despite that on 18/12/2025, none appeared for respondents, so the matter was adjourned to this day, which is a working Saturday. Even today, none has appeared for respondents, so I have heard only learned counsel for petitioner.

(3.) It is contended on behalf of petitioner that the respondents are his sons, who have encroached upon the property owned by the petitioner and since they were mistreating him, the petitioner has fled to his native village in Chennai. On merits of the matter, it is contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that since the Written Statement was filed with a delay of more than one year, the same could not be taken on record. It is contended by learned counsel for petitioner that although petitioner/plaintiff had supplied complete paperbook of suit well within time, the respondents failed to file Written Statement within time prescribed by law. However, learned counsel for petitioner submits that he is not able to show any document of acknowledgment of supply of paperbook. Further, it is contended by learned counsel for petitioner that nothing prevented the respondents from inspecting the judicial record as regards the plaint and documents so that they could file Written Statement in time.