BHARAT KAIVART AND ORS. Vs. KAMLA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by order dated 17.8.2013 in Title (P) Suit No. 101 of 2011, the present writ petition has been filed. The petitioners are defendant Nos. 1 and 2 in Title (P) Suit No. 101 of 2011. The petitioners were served summons on 2/18.1.2012 and they appeared in the suit on 2.8.2012. Vide order dated 7.2.2013, the trial court debarred the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 from filing written statement. The petitioners filed application on 2.5.2013 under Order VIII, Rule 1 CPC for taking the written statement on record however, the said application has been rejected vide order dated 17.8.2013. Aggrieved, the petitioners have preferred the present writ petition.

(2.) Vide order dated 5.8.2015, notices were issued to the respondents. The petitioners were also directed to serve dasti notice upon the respondents. Order dated 26.8.2015 records that notices upon respondent Nos. 1 to 5 were validly served however, the respondents have not appeared in the present proceeding. The matter was adjourned on two occasions thereafter. Today also there is no representation on behalf of the respondents.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were prevented from appearing in the title suit due to reasons beyond their control. After the petitioners appeared, the trial court granted time for filing written statement however, on 7.2.2013 without granting further opportunity to the defendant Nos. 1 and 2, they were debarred from filing written statement. It is contended that the provision under Order VIII, Rule 1 CPC is directory and not mandatory. The petitioners produced the medical report which discloses illness of the defendant No. 1 which was a sufficient ground for condoning the delay in filing written statement however, the trial court has erroneously disbelieved the medical report submitted by the petitioners.