BABLU LOHRA Vs. SHANKAR SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the defendants and the instant civil misc. petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dtd. 28/6/2022 by which the petitioner has been debarred from filing the written statement. The plaintiffs' suit is for declaration of right, title and interest and for recovery of possession.

(2.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that earlier SAR case no. 112 of 1989-90 was filed by the father of petitioner no. 1 for restoration under Sec. 71A of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act against the present plaintiffs and the same was allowed vide judgment dtd. 18/1/1993. The father of the petitioner no. 1 had filed the said SAR case and after his death, the petitioners were not in possession of the relevant documents which occasioned in delay in filing the written statement. It is also submitted that the requirement to file the written statement within ninety days is directory in nature in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Salem Advocate Bar Association Vs. Union of India {(2005) 6 SCC 344}.

(3.) Learned counsel for the opposite parties-plaintiffs submits that no due diligence was exercised by the defendants-appellants in preferring the written statement within the stipulated time. Learned counsel has placed reliance in Salem Advocate Bar Association (supra) stating that the extension of time cannot be mechanically allowed and there should be reasonable ground for the delay.