PERFECT PIPE INDUSTRIES Vs. KISHORE KUMAR SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the order of learned ARC whereby an application under section 5 of Limitation Act made by the petitioner for condonation of delay in filing written statement was dismissed. The delay in filing written statement was of 250 days. The petitioner was served with summons of the eviction petition some time in May/june 2006. The next date of hearing given in the summons was 3. 8. 2006. Instead of filing written statement, the petitioner (defendant before the trial Court) filed an application under order 1 Rule 10 CPC for addition of more parties on 4. 7. 2006. On 3. 8. 2006 when the Court noticed that written statement has not been filed and more than 30 days had already expired, the Court directed that written statement be filed within 15 days and copy of the same be given in advance to the opposite side. Written statement was not filed within 15 days and it was filed on 19. 4. 2007 almost after about 10 months of the service. An application under section 5 of limitation Act was filed for condonation of delay. The plea taken by the petitioner was that immediately on receipt of notice of petition, the petitioner had moved an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC and petitioner did not file written statement in order to save the time of the Court and file one single written statement of behalf all the LRs. There was no intention to delay. It was further stated that the counsel for the defendants had advised them to do so.

(2.) LEARNED trial Court came to conclusion that no sufficient ground was disclosed by the defendant for allowing the defendants to file written statement after such a long time.

(3.) ORDER 8 Rule 1 CPC was amended by the Parliament to ensure that the trials before the lower Courts are not delayed and dragged. The time limit of filing written statement within 30 days was fixed by the Parliament extendable by another 60 days, because of the practice of the opposite parties seeking adjournment after adjournment for filing written statement and to curb the evil of written statement not being filed for years together on one or the other reasons. The extension of 60 days after the expiry of 30 days can be given by the Court only for genuine reasons and when the Court is satisfied that grounds to extend the time were justified. After expiry of 90 days from the date of service of summons, the Court has power to extend the time but this power is to be exercised in rare cases where exceptional circumstances are shown by the defendant.