SARITA TIWARI Vs. VIDYA BHUSAN PANDEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition is directed against the order dated 7 May 2019 passed by Revisional Court in Civil Revision No.177 of 2018 whereby the revisional court has allowed the revision and has set aside the order dated 12 November 2018 passed by the trial court. The trial court, by the said order, had allowed the application Paper No.94-C and condoned delay in filing of the written statement by the petitioner (defendant No.2).

(2.) In short, the facts giving rise to the instant petition are as follows: -

(3.) The petitioner did not file any written statement. She kept on pursuing her application under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC. Ultimately, it was not pressed, resulting in its dismissal on 28 August 2018. She thereafter filed an application 94-C with prayer to take on record the written statement filed along with it after condoning the delay in filing the same. The application was opposed by the plaintiff-respondent on the ground that the petitioner deliberately did not file the written statement for more than twenty eight months since she entered appearance with oblique motive of delaying the proceedings. She was aware that the plaint could not be rejected on the plea of limitation but still she chose not to file the written statement.