M RAMA SWAMY Vs. M SEKHARA GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S. No.12 of 2003 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kurnool. He assails the docket order, dated 9-6-2003, passed by the trial Court, permitting the respondent herein to file written statement, after the expiry of the time stipulated under Rule 1 of Order VIII C.P.C.

(2.) The petitioner filed the suit for the relief of declaration of title and recovery of possession of the suit schedule property. The respondent herein is the 2nd defendant. He was served with the summons on 8-2-2003. He did not file the written statement till June, 2003. On 9-6-2003, l.A.No.188 of 2003 was filed under Section 151 C.P.C.with a prayer to receive the written statement. The affidavit in support of the I.A. was filed by the Advocate's Clerk of the respondent. The trial Court allowed the same.

(3.) Smt. Shanthi Neelam, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent was under obligation to file the written statement in the suit, within 30 days from the date of receiving the summons and if there existed any valid reasons, that prevented him from filing it within that time, it was open to him to file an application to extend the time not beyond 90 days therefrom. She contends that the respondent did not explain the reasons, on account of which, he could not file the written statement, within the time stipulated under Rule 1 of Order VIII C.P.C. and that the affidavit of an Advocate's Clerk was filed. She further submits that the trial Court did not give an opportunity to the petitioner to put forward his contention, nor did it record its satisfaction about the reasons pleaded for extending the time.