THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 548 of 2010 O R D E R: This Civil Revision Petition has been moved against the order passed on 08.10.2009 in I.A.No. 85 of 2008 in O.S.No. 72 of 2005 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge’s Court at Bhainsa. I.A.No. 85 of 2008 has been moved by the plaintiff seeking permission and leave of the Court to file a rejoinder affidavit to the averments contained in the written statement filed by the 5th defendant in the suit. The said I.A. has been dismissed by the Court holding that there are no legal grounds to allow the same and that the petitioner/plaintiff is at liberty to adduce the evidence in support of her claim, even in the absence of a rejoinder and that filing of the rejoinder is badly delayed and that there are no bona fide grounds. Sri K.M. Mahender Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Court can fix such terms as are considered reasonable and fair by it and allow a party to file a rejoinder affidavit to the averments contained in the written statement, as is permissible in terms of Order VIII Rule 9 CPC. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further emphasized that the husband of the petitioner/plaintiff has lost his vision towards the end of his life and during the last few years of his life, he has not ventured to come out of his house without being escorted by some one or the other of the family. In those set of circumstances, the claim made in the written statement of a gift deed said to have been executed by him has been stoutly disputed by the petitioner/plaintiff. Though respondents 2 to 5 herein have been served by registered post, they have not preferred to contest the Civil Revision Petition. Having given my anxious consideration to the averments made in the rejoinder affidavit and in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances narrated therein, I consider that the Court could have imposed costs of Rs.500/- on the petitioner/plaintiff payable to the 5th defendant in the suit so as to offset the possible delay in moving the said I.A., instead of dismissing it altogether. It is a settled principle of law that delay should not defeat a just cause. Therefore, I consider it appropriate to set aside the order passed on 08.10.2009 by the Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Bhainsa in I.A.No. 85 of 2008 and allow the rejoinder affidavit filed by the petitioner/plaintiff to be taken on record of civil suit O.S.No. 72 of 2005. The rejoinder affidavit filed by the plaintiff in the suit O.S.No. 72 of 2005 be taken on record, subject to the petitioner/plaintiff depositing a sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) on or before 19.07.2010 in Junior Civil Judge’s Court at Bhainsa which amount be transmitted to the contesting defendant in the suit. Failure to deposit the sum of Rs.500/- before 19.07.2010 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge’s Court at Bhainsa by the petitioner/plaintiff would automatically disentitle the rejoinder affidavit filed by her to form part of the record, without any further reference to this Court. The contesting defendant be granted 30 days’ time from 19.07.2010 to file additional written statement, if he/she desires to file such an additional written statement. Since an additional issue, if necessary, can be settled for trial by the Court itself, the Junior Civil Judge’s Court at Bhainsa is directed to examine the necessity of framing any such additional issue and if it is considered as necessary and essential to do so, it may do so on its own without any further necessity of applications moved either by the plaintiff or the defendants in the suit for that purpose. Since this is an old suit of 2005, it is needless to say that every effort must be made by the Junior Civil Judges Court, Bhainsa to ensure that the suit is disposed of as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, before 31.12.2010. With this, the Civil Revision Petition stands allowed. No costs. ---------------------------------- (NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J) 2nd July 2010 ksld