GOUREEPADA CHATTOPADHYAYA Vs. JANKI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is directed against an order of the Court be-low rejecting the plaintiffs' petition for striking out the defence of the defendant and deciding the suit ex parte.

(2.) In the suit instituted by the plaintiff-petitioner for removal of the defendant from the suit premises, the defendant appeared on 4-6-1974 with a Vakalatnama and a petition for time to file written statement, immediately on the service of the summons. After taking some further adjournments for filing the written statement, he filed it on 5-8-1974 along with the statement of address. Later on, on 27-11-1974, the plaintiff filed a petition under Order VIII, Rule 11 (Patna Amendment) of the Code of Civil Procedure for striking out the defence on the ground that the defendant did not comply with the requirement of Rule 11 aforesaid, by having failed to furnish "the statement of his address". The learned Subordinate Judge, however, on taking a view that the provision contained in Order VIII, Rule 11 was not mandatory and vested ample discretion, depending on the circumstances of each case, in the Court, has rejected the plaintiff's prayer.

(3.) Rule 11 was added by the Patna High Court to Order VIII of the Code of Civil Procedure which reads;