Singte Bench BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT W.P227r^lL^%^^/2008 PETITIONERS NON-APPLICANT No.2 & 3 :1. Smt. Anju Gupta, Wd/o. Late Navin Kumar Gupta, aged about 33 years, 'i; 2. Monti, S/Q. Late Navin Kumar Gupta, aged about 2 years, minor-through natural guardian and mother Smt. Anju Gupta, Wd/o. Late Navin Kumar Gupta, Both R/o. House of Dharmendra Keshari, near Vijyasen Mandir, Mahrshidayanand Ward, Sagar(M.P.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS .vA^.--^' •^f. .-•••" ..-• ^-^.^^r.--"/- -^\s^ f<!,^ •\x- ^s:<J3.*; ^'""''Bfe, wess\. '.,:'":s:/f ?g-i.u«KaB'-;^'• ' -b :1. Smt. Geeta Devi, W/o. Ramnaresh Gupta, aged about 52 years, R/o. Deviganj Road, Sangam Chowk, Ambikapur, P.S. & Tah. Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) (APPUCANT) 2. Ramnaresh Gupta, S/o. Late Shyamdhan Gupta, aged about 62 years, Occupation-business, R/o. Deviganj Road, Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G) 3. Branch Manager, Life Insurance Corporation, OfRce- Mahamaya Road, Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) (NON-APPLICANTS) WRIT PETIT10N UNDER ARTICLE227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. !IK1 HiGHCOUKTOfeCHHArFJSOARHATBILASPUR Writ Petition (227) N&. 6997 of2008 PETiTIONERS Smt. Anju Gupta and anothe; \fersys Smt. Geeta Devi and otheTs. WR<TPET!TjQNUNBERAm-IC).,E227©FTHEJ:!ONSTITUIONOF (SB: Hon'bie Mr; N.K. sAd^rwat, d.) Prasent : IVir. A.K^F'rasadr:Bo|l^iel^i1;<3r|Te,|3etitioners. : . ;Mr. synitCTpatBi^^risel^i^po^^ •l^r.?inai"asen:^aHy|^QUtjsei^<3Krespondent'Nct.2. • Mr. Prashant Qypta, (;Qunseli?ter respondent No. 3. Q.SDES (08.07.2011) With thecohsent of the parties, thematter isheard finally. 1. Petitioners after puttlng their appg'arance in the Succession Case No.10/2007 filed by respondent No, 1 in the courtof First Civil Judge, Class- !; Ambikapur on 10.3.2008, failedto file their written statement tjii 7.8.2008 i.e, thedate givenbythetrial Court to them as a last opportunity. Therefore, the trial court ctosed the oppbrtunity of the petitioners io file their written statemeht; however, immediately on the next date of hearing i.e. 6.9.2008 the petitioners had fiied their written statemenf along with the application for taRing their writt.en statement on record. The above applieatjon was also dismissed by the trial 'Gourt vide impugned order dated 18.9.2008. Hencethis petition. • : . , :-^' • • ' . •:. . , 2. I have heard counsel fbrlhe parties and perused the,material availableon record includingordersitnpugned. . | Y ' '. ' \ 3. It is true that the petitionera have faited to fite their written statsment within the time prescribed ynder the Code |Qf Civjl Procedure, howevsr, it appears'that the petitioners have fijecf their wqtten sfatement immediately ort the next date of,hea|1ng j.e, 6.9.2008 and as the provisions contained in under Orcler 8 l^ute.l of the CPC are'not mandatory ,but diteetory and ffte case is at ts.initia! ^•,,.^ j .:.BI"«Si% RiP1-"1 IV^ .•liaaa' stage, no prejudice will be caused to the respondents ifthe written statement filed by the petitioners will be taken on record. Respondent No. 1 can be compensated by imposing reasonable cost upon the petitioner. .c. , jy 3. In view of above, the sufficienf grounds have been made out for interference of this Court under Article 227 of ihe Cpnsfitution of India. The petition is allowed. Impughed'^prders dated 7.8.2008 and 18.9.2009 passed by Civil Judge, Class I, Ambikapur in Succession Case No.10/2007 are set -aside. ItSis directed that^ written statement filed by the petltioneresriallfrfcietakeR pn recordsubjectof payment of Rs.500 as cost ttie respotident No. 1 within a period of one monthfromtoday. ' No order as to cost. Sd/- . pi^.Agrawal Judge