TIKAM Vs. JAGDISH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of the instant writ petition, the petitioners have beseeched to quash and set-aside the order dated 23.2.2006, whereby the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Bayana, District Bharatpur gainsaid to take the written statement of defence on record filed by the petitioners-defendants.

(2.) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record, it is noticed that a suit for permanent injunction came to be filed by the respondents-plaintiff against the petitioners-defendants in the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Bayana. The petitioners-defendants are found not to have filed the written statement of defence within the stipulated period as envisaged under Order 8 Rule 1 CPC. The learned trial court is found to have gainsaid to take the written statement of defence on record for the simple reason that the petitioners-defendants did not file the written statement in 90 days nor they could explain the delay for not filing the written statement as such. Learned counsel for the petitioners canvassed that they could not file the written statement of defence in the absence of copy of plaint as they were not served with a copy of plaint along-with the summon and thus, they filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 (e) CPC imploring the court to reject the plaint. Both the prayers put forth by the learned counsel for the defendants were dismissed and the right of the petitioners-defendants to file the written statement of defence was closed.

(3.) THE learned trial court is also directed to expedite the trial of the suit and decide the same as early as possible preferably within a period of six to eight months as the suit has been pending for the last eights years.