GANDHI DALBEHERA Vs. DEEPCHAND KESHWANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner who is the defendant No.3 in T.S. No.75 of 2004 challenging the order dated 1.3.2006 passed by the Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bolangir in above said suit, whereby the learned Court has rejected the petition filed by the defendant No.3 to accept the written statement filed by him, since the same was filed after expiry of the prescribed period of 90 days.

(2.) Heard Mr. C. Samantaroy, learned Counsel for the petitioner.

(3.) Mr. Samantaroy submits that it is well settled that the prescribed period of 90 days for filing of the written statement under Order 8, Rule 1 of the C.P.C. is a directory one but not mandatory and in that view of the matter, learned Court below, ought to have accepted the written statement filed by the defendant No.3, even though the same was filed beyond the prescribed period of 90 days. In support of his contention, learned Counsel relied upon and cited the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Smt. Rani Kusum v. Kanchan Devi and Ors. reported in 2006 (I) OLR (SC) 8 as well as decision of this Court in the case of Mangelal Jhajharia v. Govindram Girdhar reported in 2006 (I) OLR 428.