COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPURfC.G.^ W.P. FU.A. 2271 No. ^?s6\ of 2009 v. Bhola Prasad

RESPONDENTS/ Plaintiff Defendantno. 2 &3 2. Defendant no.4 aged about 30 years, caste Teli, Bhatthjpara, R/o Village Bhaiswar, Tahsil Sonhat, Distt. Korea (C.G.) Kaushilya Wd/o Heeralal Sahu, caste Teli, aged about 55 years, Bhatthipara, R/o Village Bhaiswar, Tahsil Sonhat, Distt. Korea (C.G.) Fulkunwar, W/o Radhesyam Sahu, aged about 27 years, R/o Village Katgodi, Tahsil Sonhat, Distt. Korea (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh Through <$ollector, Korea Baikunthpur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA F.HC—78 y tlWRfl SfrHTcb ^^T ^I^KI^ ^Tll^^Ko, ?^<ni^^< ^PC^^ ^o. ^©f^ . 200 ^ ^n^?T '^^' (^i^^r) 3Ti^l^T I^^Jch 'oW l3??^T ^RW ^ay^ ^f^cT 3^i ct)S<4(<n<fl^ 'RTR^lf "fe^ '^^iRw'^n^T ^f Tf^FglT

5.B. Hon'bl®Shri Justice N.K, Agohval 1)3-08-2009 Shri &,N. Prajapati, counsel fo^ the petitioner. Shri P.K. Bhaduri, counsel for t}ie State. Heard. The instant petition is direct^d P, 1.5-05-2009 passed by Sscond Civil against the order dated Tudge, Class-I, Baikunthpur Jn Civii Suit No.73-A/2005 whereby|and whereunder the prayer |>f the petitioner/respondent No,l f<^r granting one more time to fiie written statement has been rejej :ted and opportunity to file ^tatement was closed by the trial Co^rt on the ground that after ^ompietion of 90 days from the s^r ^rvice of summons on the j)etitioner, no further timecan be g hanted under the provisions tontained in Order 8 of CP.C. \ ^, Learned counsel the pe| "itioner submits that )rovision contained in Order 8 Rute II of CP.C. are not mandatory |xnd directory and in suitable ca| ses, time to file written Matement can be granted by the Coijrt even after compietion of ^O days, For this, he piaced relio|ice upon the judgment of ^^^^^,,. / :-HC—78 ^sf ^i^l^l^, yTtl-H<l<o, f®l<r)l<H'j,< . NIINdls»»^l<*»"""""" t^P (L^-^-)^o.S^/i """"""""""""""""y^^

200^ 3TT^T<q^Fr ( ^I^<i%T) 3;Tf^T ^5T ftFfN? ^sn ^?^r ^RN5> ^(HW^ft^T'ST^ -^ ^Mid^l'l 'HTR^f ^f ^^ T^?R i?3iRR3?I^T Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of ^olba vs. Kashao and Ors.; reported in 2008 SAR (CiviS) 517 ^upreme Courl'. 4,

I have gone carefuily throug^ the record of the case, On 15-05-2009, an applicati4i was filed by the petitiQner i4n :|>r filing written statement on No. 1 for grant of one more time f| two grounds; firstly, the copy of plaint served upon the petitioner was not served along witl|i the documents and secondly, due to illness, the defendant befcame unable to file written statement. 6, Shri Prajapati learned coun^ ^el for the petitioner submits that at ieast one more opportunit^ ou9ht to have been granted by the Court below eyen upon imp|< tmpjosing some reasonable costs. He further submits that the writUn statement is ready and the petitioner will file the same befor^ the Trial Court on the next date of hearing i.e. 13-08-2009.

In view of the dictum of Hor|'ble the Supreme Court in the above referred case, the Supreme fourt has held that under the provision, Order 8 C.P.C. are direc| direcjtory in nature and iooking to the fact situation of the case, I am| jof the opinion, an opportunity ;;^. Ij;^J ^v. ^'^ -3'^ •^I^^R, "f^rray ^tN^, ^ U)^C^^-^) ^^•3^6 / ^s> 200 ^ ^^?? "q?^ .('^t^^?) ^i^i^r'fe^N imi-31T^^HN> i^TW^t^^nt^ ought to have been granted to fHe ^l^feT^ Wl^f ^ fe^ Tf^?R ^^tf^ 317^1 petitioner by the Trial Court. Therefore, the impugned order is setaside and it is directed that on payment of Rs.1000/- j-owards costs, the Trial Court shGl! aliow the petitioner to ^ ile the written statement on 13-08-2009 i.e. on the next da-| 1-e of hearing before the Triai Court, If the petitioner files wrifrten statement before the Trial Court on 13-08-2009, the Trial i ^ourt shall thereafter, proceed to decide the case in accordance ^/ith law expeditiousiy. 8, If the respondents submi' any grievance, they may file an appropriate appiication,

Certified copy as per rules| Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge Kvr ^fRT^3T?NnK^1Jr?^^^HNTlt^—FS/95—11/2008—1«00,000.