JITEN BORDOLOI Vs. CHOUHAN PANDIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHILE Title Suit No. 88/2005 was lying fixed for ex parte hearing against the defendants in the suit, the defendent No. 2, who is opposite party in the present revision, filed a petition alongwith his written statement praying to the Court to pass necessary order (s) accepting the written statement. The plaintiff, who is petitioner in the present revision, raised objection to the prayer so made by the defendent No. 2 and also filed a petition urging the Court to pronounce in terms of the provisions of Order VIII, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure ( in short, 'the Code'), the judgment, in the suit on the ground that the defendants had failed to submit their written statements within the time allowed by the Court.

(2.) UPON hearing learned counsel for the parties on both the petitions, learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sibsagar, on 21. 06. 2004, passed an order accepting the written statement and declining thereby to pronounce the judgment in the suit as had been sought for by the plaintiff. Aggrieved by the order, dated 21. 06. 2004, aforementioned, the plaintiff has impugned the same in the present revision.

(3.) I have heard Mr. G. C. Phukan, learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner, and Mr. R. P. Kakoti, learned counsel for the defendants opposite party.