RAJENDRA KUMAR BANSAL Vs. RAVINDRA MALAV AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the orders dated 3.3.2003. 22.1.2001 and 22.12.2004 passed by VIIIth Additional District Jue. Gwalior rejecting the prayer made by the petitioner to take on record the written statement filed by him. Respondent No. 1 Rajendra Malav had filed the suit in question under section 307 (5) of Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act against the petitioner so also against the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and the prayer made in the said suit was that certain constructions illegally made by the petitioner be removed.

(2.) In the suit in question various applications were filed being under Order 14, Rule 5 and under Order 26 Civil Procedure Code. However, when the petitioner did not file his written statement within a reasonable time learned Court vide order dated 3.3.2003 Annexure P/5 closed the right of the petitioner to file the written statement. Petitioner challenged the aforesaid order by filing a writ petition before this Court W.P. No. 1660/03 and simultaneously filed the review application before the learned Court below. Finding the review application to be pending writ petition filed by the petitioner W.P. No. 1660/03 was dismissed by this Court vide Annexure P/6 and the review application was also dismissed vide Annexure P/7 on 16.9.2003. Thereafter, petitioner again filed an application under section 151. C.Y.C. for taking the written statement on record. This application has been rejected vide Annexure-P/ 1 on 22.1.2004.

(3.) Shri Ruchir Khandalkar, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that as petitioner had filed the written statement within a reasonable time learned Court should have adopted a lenient view and should have taken the written statement on record. It was argued by him that refusal to take on record the written statement would amount to grave injustice to the petitioner and therefore seeks interference in the matter in this petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution.