Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Acts
  • Order VIII Rule 1 CPC
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Acts
  • Order VIII Rule 1 CPC

    Desh Raj v. Bal Kishan (Deceased Thro Proposed Lrs) .

    Yogesh Khanna, J.:— By this petition the petitioner has impugned the order dated 03.11.2017 whereby an application under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC filed by the petitioner/defendant in Civil Suit No. 411/2017 was dismissed and his right to file the written statement was declined on the plea that he had failed to file the written statement within a statutory period of 90 days.

    2. A bare perusal of the record would reveal the defendant was duly served and was supplied with the copy of the plaint and annexures on 15.05.2017 and he took time to file the written statement and lastly on 11.10.2017 his right to file the written statement was closed, after 120 days of the date of notice. It is alleged the defendant filed the written statement/reply on 02.11.2017 as noted in the order dated 03.11.2017.

    3. Since the defendant failed to file the written statement within 120 days, the learned Trial Court right rejected such application per Oku Tech Private Limited v. Sangeet Agarwal In CS(OS) 3390/2015 decided on 11.08.2016 wherein it was held there is no discretion of the Court to extend the time for filing the written statement beyond 120 days after the service of the summons.

    4. In view of the submissions so made the petition stands dismissed. Order dasti.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Desh Raj v. Bal Kishan (Deceased Thro Proposed Lrs) .
    (Nov 26, 2018)