NANKU Vs. KAILASH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this election petition respondent No. 1, the returned candidate was served with the summons of the petition on 26.3.2004. The first date fixed in the election petition was 6.4.2004. On 6.4.2004 Smt. Kamla Singh learned Counsel had filed Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No. 1 alongwith application for grant of two months time for filing the written statement. Thereafter another application-dated 13.5.2004 was filed seeking further time for filing written statement. On the said application an order was passed granting time to file written statement till 3.7.2004. High Court was going to close for summer vacation from 30.5.2004 till 2.7.2004 during which period ninety days period from date of service was to expire. It was in view of this fact and the provisions of Order 8, Rule 1 C.P.C. as amended in 2002 requiring written statement to be filed not later than ninety days from the date of service of summons, that the time to file written statement on the opening day after summer vacation was granted.

(2.) The written statement was filed on 8.7.2004 alongwith delay condonation application. Affidavit of Arvind Tiwari clerk of learned Counsel for respondent No. 1, dated 15.7.2004 in support of delay condonation application was also filed later on. In the affidavit it has been stated that real nephew of learned Counsel died at Ghazipur on 22.6.2004 hence learned Counsel had to go to Ghazipur where she stayed till 5.7.2004, the date on which tehrawin of the deceased took place and it has further been stated in the said affidavit that written statement was prepared by the learned Counsel at Ghazipur and sent to Allahabad through respondent No. 1 for filing and that written statement was sworn on 1.7.2004 but due to lack of knowledge it could not be submitted in the registry.

(3.) As far as ground for condonation of delay is concerned I am satisfied that the same is quite genuine and acceptable. The delay was of only five days and occurred due to personal reasons of the learned Counsel. Even though the delay of 6th and 7th July has not very properly been explained, however due to the fact that a death had occurred in the family of learned Counsel the same also deserves to be condoned.