HARJINDER SINGH Vs. HARSH GUPTA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff has assailed the order dated 28.09.2017, passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Ludhiana who allowed the defendant to file the written statement and dismissed the application filed by the plaintiff filed under Order 8, Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code.

(2.) The plaintiff filed a suit in January 2017 seeking damages from the defendants who had made false and defamatory allegations against him. The defendants could not be served in the ordinary way Munadi was ordered for 05.04.2017. The Presiding Officer was proceeding on leave on 05.04.2017, the case was taken up a day earlier and adjourned to 05.05.2017. On 05.05.2017 appearance was put in by defendant No. 1 while defendant No. 2 was proceeded ex parte. Defendant No. 1 did not file written statement though the matter was adjourned three times and thereafter last opportunity was granted. The written statement was not even filed on 31.08.2017. An application was moved under Order 8, Rule 1 of CPC. The lower Court adjourned the case giving fortnight's date for filing reply. Neither the written statement nor the reply was filed on that day and the Court gave another opportunity making it clear that no further opportunity shall be granted. On the adjourned hearing i.e. on 28.09.2017, written statement was filed and the application filed by the plaintiff was dismissed as infructuous. On the same day, another application under Order 7, Rule 11 of CPC was filed by the defendant and the case was adjourned for its reply.

(3.) The plaintiff is aggrieved by the order vide which the lower Court has allowed the defendant to file the written statement beyond the period of 90 days fixed under Order 8, Rule 1 of CPC.