D HENRY THIAGARAJ Vs. M AZARISH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is preferred against the order of the II Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai made in I.A.No.22549 of 2004 in O.S.No.6750 of 2004, dismissing the petition seeking rejection of the written statement filed by the defendants 1, 2, 3 and 5. Plaintiff is the revision petitioner.

(2.) DALIT Liberation Education Trust (in short 'the Trust') was established in the year 1985. plaintiffs, D-1 and D-2 are the founding trustees. The revision petitioner/plaintiff was the managing trustee. On 14.2.2002, the Board of Trustees has passed resolutions, some of which were against the revision petitioner/ plaintiff. Thereafter, the plaintiff and others have filed multitude of suits.

(3.) COUNTERING the arguments, the learned counsel of the contesting respondents has also placed reliance upon the same decision Rani Kusum v. Kanchan Devi and others, (20 L.W. 277: (2005) 4 C.T.C.809. Drawing attention of the Court to the series of litigation filed by the plaintiff, the learned counsel for the contesting respondents has submitted that only on petition the Court has extended the time for filing of the written statement. It is further submitted that at the time of filing the written statement, the plaintiff has not raised any objection and when the injunction application was taken up for enquiry, nearly two months after the filing of the written statement, or the first time the plaintiff has raised objection to reject the written statement on the ground that the written statement was not filed within the stipulated time. Submitting that the procedure is only handmaid of justice and the time stipulated for filing O.8, Rule 1, C.P.C., is only directory, the learned counsel for the contesting respondents/defendants has submitted that the Court below was right in receiving the written statement filed on 26.4.2005 and that there is no reason warranting interference.