FARJANA BANU Vs. PARVEZ ALAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A.K.Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.Roy, learned counsel for the respondent/caveator.

(2.) The caveat stands discharged.

(3.) The petitioner had married the respondent sometime in the year 1994 and out of the said wed lock three children were born. Subsequently, some marital disputes arose between the parties and they started living separately. The respondent/husband thereafter filed an application under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (for short the 'Act') for custody of the minor daughters and it was registered as Misc. (G) No. 53/2003. On notice being issued, the petitioner appeared before the District Judge, Tinsukia and prayed for time to file the written statement and subsequently the prayer for allowing time to file written statement was rejected under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC. The petitioner had filed the written statement and thereafter she filed an application under Section 151 CPC for accepting the written statement. The learned District Judge, Tinsukia, thereafter, vide order, dated 20.3.2004 which is impugned in this writ petition, rejected the prayer for accepting the written statement.