BIHARI MAHTO Vs. MURLIDHAR MAHTO @ NAKUL MAHTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition has been preferred against the order, passed by the learned Munsif, Bermo at Tenughat dated 24th September, 2010 in Title Suit No. 12 of 2010 whereby, the written statement filed by the present petitioners, who are original defendants, has not been accepted mainly on the ground of delay of 11 days.

(2.) HAVING heard counsel for the petitioners and looking to the facts and cir -cumstances of the case, it appears that the respondents are the original plaintiffs, who have instituted Title Suit No. 12 of 2010. The present petitioners are original defendants.

(3.) THE provisions of Order VIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, is not mandatory in nature as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Salem Advocate Bar Association vs. Union of India as reported in (2005)6 SCC 344 [ : 2005(4) JLJR (SC) 169].