ANANTNARAYAN Vs. SURESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have challenged the order dtd. 15/9/2023 passed by the trial Court whereby their right to file the written statement as well as reply to the injunction application filed by the plaintiffs has been closed. The petitioners have also challenged the order dtd. 16/4/2024 passed by the trial Court whereby their application under Sec. 151 of the CPC for taking the written statement and the reply to the injunction application on record has been rejected.

(2.) A perusal of the impugned order dtd. 16/4/2024 shows that the application under Sec. 151 of the CPC dtd. 22/9/2023 filed by the petitioners has been rejected by observing that by way of the same the petitioners are seeking review of order dtd. 15/9/2023 which is impermissible. The trial Court has not adverted to the reasons as had been ascribed by the petitioners in their application.

(3.) Earlier the right of the petitioners to file their written statement and reply to injunction application was closed. Thereafter they filed an application for taking the written statement and the reply on record. Therein they had given reasons as to why the written statement and reply could not be filed by them earlier. They were seeking exercise of inherent power of the trial Court to take the written statement and reply on record. In the strict sense they were not seeking review of the earlier order. Even if the trial Court had earlier closed the right of the petitioners, then also it was open for it to have taken the written statement and reply on record exercising inherent powers provided that sufficient cause for the same had been shown.