IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.447 of 2009 CHANDRAWATI DEVI, W/O BALISTAR CHAMAR, R/O VILLAGE-KALANI, P.S.-RAMGARH, DISTRICT-KAIMUR. ………DEFENDANT 2ND SET-PETITIONER. Versus 1. NITHALI CHAMAR, S/O BARHU CHAMAR 2. JOKHU CHAMAR, S/O KAMALU CHAMAR 3. JHAGARU CHAMAR 4. DHORHA CHAMAR BOTH SONS OF NITHALI CHAMAR 5. BAHADUR CHAMAR 6. SAHADUR CHAMAR 7. SRI BHAGWAN CHAMAR ALL SONS OF JHAGARU CHAMAR 8. SURAJ CHAMAR 9. BABLU CHAMAR 10. JAI PRAKASH CHAMAR ALL SONS OF DHORHA CHAMAR ALL RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE-MOULA SAHUKA, P.S.- RAMGARH, DISTRICT-KAIMUR (BHABHUA). ………PLAINTIFFS/OPP. PARTIES. ----------- 5 29.04.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. This revision application has been filed by the defendant against order dated 19.12.2008 passed by the learned Sub-Judge-II, Bhabhua in Title Suit No. 261/1999 by which the petition of the defendant no. 36 for recall of the order dated 12.8.2008 refusing her to file written statement has been rejected on the ground that she had appeared in 2001 but till that time no written statement had been filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the suit is for partition of joint family properties and it is at its threshold as no party has filed written statement and the evidence of parties have not yet started. He submits that the petitioner- - 2 - defendant is a rustic lady and she was misled on account of vacancy in the court for quite long time. He submits that the petitioner is ready to pay cost as may be fixed by the learned court below for allowing her to file her written statement. In view of the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, the matter is remitted back to the court below to re-consider the prayer of the defendant taking into account the statements of learned counsel for the petitioner as noticed hereinabove and re-hear the parties on the same. In case the learned court below is satisfied that the defendant could not file her written statement due to bona fide mistake on her part, the court below shall consider allowing her for the same with cost which it may consider fit and proper. With the above observations and directions, the revision application is disposed of. Arvind/ (J.N Singh, J)