JAGDISH PRASAD MEENA Vs. ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE defendant-petitioners have preferred this writ petition challenging the impugned order dated 2nd August, 2006 passed by the trial court, whereby the applications under Order 8 Rule 10 and Order 8 Rule 1 CPC filed by the plaintiff for not taking the written-statement on record being filed after expiry of 90 days has been allowed and it has been directed that defendants' writtenstatement is not taken on record and the same can be kept in Part-D of the file.

(3.) THE brief facts of the case are that plaintiff-respondent no. 2 Smt. Chawali Meena filed a suit for permanent injunction against the defendant-petitioners in the trial court along-with an application for temporary injunction. The defendants filed their written-statement in the trial court on 1st august, 2003. The plaintiff filed an application that written-statement has been filed after the expiry of period of 90 days, as provided under Order 8 Rule 1 CPC, therefore, the same cannot be taken on record. The trial court allowed the said application and passed an order that writtenstatement is not taken on record. Hence this writ petition has been preferred on behalf of the defendants.