KRISHNA CHAND Vs. SADANAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashutosh Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

(2.) By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the action of the court below by which the written statement filed by the defendant has been taken on record inspite of the application under Order 8, Rule 10 CPC. It is stated that the petitioner filed a suit for permanent injunction in 2002 and in 2002 itself, the defendant has put in appearance but did not file written statement even upon opportunities being given on a number of occasions and last time opportunity was granted on 20.8.2010. One more opportunity to the defendants to file their written statement and the matter was fixed for 17.9.2010. By the order dated 17.9.2010 also no written statement was filed and thereafter finally on 27.10.2010 written statement was filed without there being any direction by the court as earlier time granted by the court has already expired and application under Order 8, Rule 10 C.P.C. has been rejected imposing a cost of Rs. 125/- upon the defendants and the written statement has been taken on record.

(3.) I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashutosh Mani Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for defendant respondent No.2.