PANCHU RAM Vs. SATYANARAYAN JAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this writ petition, the Petitioner has implored to quash and set-aside the orders dated 30th August, 2006 and 26th October, 2006 rendered by Additional District Judge, Kotputli, District Jaipur, whereby the opportunity for filing written-statement was closed and the application under Order 8 Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure was dismissed accordingly.

(2.) Background facts of the case depict that Plaintiff-Respondent filed a civil suit for damages before the Additional District Judge, Kotputli, Jaipur on the premise that he suffered damages on account of a false FIR having been lodged against him by the Petitioner at Police Station, Pragpura. In this suit, Shri Purshottam Bidani, Advocate put his appearance on behalf of Respondent No. 1 on 22nd May, 2006 and filed his powers accordingly. He gave an undertaking to the Court to file powers on behalf of Respondent No. 2 and written-statement on the next date of hearing. The case was adjourned to 30th August, 2006. On 30th August, 2006, learned Counsel for the Respondents had gone out of headquarter due to some urgent work and one brief holder Advocate appeared for him. Brief holder prayed the learned Court to grant one opportunity to file the written-statement, but the learned Additional District Judge, Kotputli did not grant an opportunity and closed the opportunity of filing the written-statement. Thereafter on 26th October, 2006, the Petitioner-Defendant filed an application under Order 8 Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure imploring to permit him to file the written-statement in the interest of justice, but that application was also rejected for the reasons mentioned in the impugned order dated 26th October, the Petitioner has filed this writ petition.

(3.) Heard the learned Counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record.