MAMATA TRIPATHY Vs. ARCON RETREAT OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition challenges the order dated 12.7.2018 passed by learned 1st Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Bhubaneswar in C.S. No.7846 of 2015, whereby and whereunder learned trial court has accepted the written statement filed by the defendant.

(2.) Since the dispute lies in a narrow compass, it is not necessary to recount in detail the cases of the parties. Suffice it to say that the plaintiff-petitioner instituted the suit for declaration and permanent injunction. Summons issued to the defendant fixing 11.9.2015 for appearance and file written statement. On 5.8.2015, the defendant entered appearance through its counsel. He filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. for rejection of plaint. By order dated 8.9.2015, learned trial court rejected the petition. Thereafter the matter has suffered several adjournments. On 28.7.2016, the plaintiff filed an application to debar the defendant from filing the written statement and proceed with the suit. On 20.10.2016, learned trial court came to hold that the defendant has appeared in the suit. No written statement is filed within the stipulated period. Thus the defendant is precluded from filing the written statement. It granted liberty to the defendant to participate in the hearing of the suit. While the matter stood thus, the defendant filed written statement along with an application to accept the same on 29.6.2017. In the application, the defendant has assigned the following reasons in not filing the written statement in time.

(3.) Heard Mr. Bijoy Anand Mohanty, learned Senior Advocate, along with Miss Sikata Sitiratna, learned Advocate, for the petitioner and Mr. Brajaraj Prusty, learned Advocate, for the opposite party.