IN THE HON*Bl,E HIBH COURT OF CHHBTTISOAiSl AT BILASPUR Writ Petition No* 231 /2005 PBTITIONER OEFENQANT- Ram vilas Singh agea not known, S/o Shri. Sitaram Stngh, R/o* near Banjari Mandir, Ranaabhatha, Bhanpuri Raipur, Tah. & Distt. Raipur. RESPONJ PT^TNT^^^"'W VERSUS ;. -fjt^ ^•^.^^ •*" . - '.;* ^yf f' t^""/^ (^' A---" ^mt. Alpana Devi aged about 37 years, W/b. Shri Prafulla Kumar Kajethiya, R/o. Geeta Nagar, diaube Colony Raipur, through afcfcorney holder Shri Jayanti Lal Majethi-ya S/o Shri Durlabhjee Bhai Majethiya, R/o. ssssis: Geeta Nagar chaube Colony, Raipur. _fRTr^ETITIpN_UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. ^ XI-HC-78 3^'RiprRPT, »^)<-<'is,Picii+iy *11*lP1t Sh*li<ft "''" ••••••"•"•' * ^^ 200 stf^f ^(^K ('i^3^8T) 3ii^Tci>rf?:TJ^ <raT3II^Tst)*) ?^<iTW;Erf?(T3n^T 6-1I-.2U06 yini Malay Kumar Bnaclun, A4 yim Man'enclra Kaliu. Aclvocatel ths mstant petition is an'ected| passea by Keconcl Additional Cn'u.Jl A'2004, vvhica has been nled along' Juclge wtule deciauig application urid^ ot the plamtirt has procesaed uncler Ufl petitioner and posted me case tor re| considermg tne wntten statementtlled| above order that number of opportuni wntten statement ancl Ultimately last o] ,iiUU4 was given. ihe cletenclant Uiei Aowever. ttie wntten statement so ril( (Jrder 6 Rules 14 and 15 of G.P.C. as ti and was not clully veritiecl ancl, theret^ statement and tiius consiaei'ing tlie wliereunder wntten stateinent is to bs tlie impugnecl orcler lias been passscl. Leamed counsel tortfie petition by the defendant on 5-3-2004 wittlin oecause tfte cieteniJant was not avau; detenclant. llie cletect, tt any, was cui court below ougtlt to ftave given an o] aelect m tfte encls otjustice ancl, Uieren ttiWfd'ifl-f WRTt' ff fet;ft<R«K ^gil^irsn^T vocate lortlie petitioner. tor Uie responclent. against the impugned order dated 10-1-2005 iclge Class 1, Kaipui- m Civil Buit £vo. Slb- wita ttie petiuon wtiei'eby tlie leamecl Civii Section 151 oftlie Code ofcivil Procedure ler 8 Rule 10 ofG.P.C. against the defendant- :orcling or ewaence. ot me plamtitt wffliout |t>y me petitioner on S-^-^UU4. it is aeia m tfte pes nave oeen given to tlie aetendant to file ^portuaity for flting written statement by 5-4- leafier on 5-3-2004 fiied nTitten statement. |a dia not con'esponcl to tlie requu'ement ot same was not duUy signea by tlie cletenclant )ie, tfte same coulcl not be tei'mecl as nTitten Iprovisions ot Ui'cler K Kule l ot C.f.c. ttiled within 90 davs of ser'.dce of suinmons, submits tftat the wntten statement was lilsa (ie time allowea by the tnal Coiu-t, however i(>le, ttte same dia not bear sisnature ot tlie "tible and m tfts atoresaicl cu'cumstances. me Ipottuiuty to ttie cletendant to cia'e ttie aoove ('e, the unpugned orctei- calls tor mtertsrence. P.T.O. XI-HC-78 WRdt SRtTltta 'S^ •<fWM't, wSw\s,^mvy. V?' p-Mo- ^Si SQO-S~ ^200 3<i^i Maw ('i?^^') sn^frwfeN) (WSn^Tsbli* p/ s^iraTafia'sn^T Un tlie ottier liand. leamecl judgment m tfae mafter ot &aUasli -v- 4SV arguecl tbat tfie extenslon ot turt may be gi'anted only by way of exce]|) anct waere me Couil 13 saUstiea tlia^ i\ part ot detenclant or tus counsel, it l tiave hearcl leamea counsell order. I from penisal ot ttie oi'tler, it i^ 3-5-2UU4 i.e. witftm Uie penod auow^ct Bowever. the same was not taKen on rj simply because it did not bear signajture beiow ougtit to ttsve allowed ttie dete^ anct aeculscl the suit only on ment anc), petition is aUowed. llie Court below tne viTltten statement tUecl tiy on S-j-i: record anci proceecl turtlier aner appro| ot Uie detendant. tor tuuig wntten statement beyoncl yu aai's )tion and tor reasons to tie recorded m nTitmg is because ot iaxity or gross negflgence on tlie caiifeiot be extended. |tor tfte parties. l Iwve perysetl the impugnecl »i<iFn41-iHwvfi ff teld' <Fa]*<;i< ^Tsri^ffl'an^sr sounsel for the respondent relying upon the ManliKu ana'otliers reoortea m l2l)U5)4 ALC eviclent ttiat tlie mTitten statement was tilea on tiy ttie Coiul; below to tils wntten statement, scora oi' not consiclered to be wntten statement ot ttie detendant. tti my view, tlie Court idant to cure the dsfect in the written statement theretore, m the atoresaia reasons, ttie mstant sliaU allow tlie detendant to cure tfte detect m ^UU4, ancl Uiei'ealtei' lie sliall taKe Uw same on pnately imposmg cast tor me laxity on tfte part Sd/- DhirendraMisbra Judge P.T.O.