// 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.245/2005 Jaswant S/o Shri Ramavtar and Others Versus Civil Judge (Jr.Div.) & Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Behror, District Alwar and Others Date of Order ::: 22.05.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri H.P. Singh, Counsel for petitioners Shri Ashok Bansal, Counsel for respondents No.2 & 3 #### By the Court:- Heard learned counsel for the parties. Plaintiff-respondents No.2 and 3 filed a suit for permanent injunction in the trial court on 29th September, 2001, wherein summons of suit were served on the defendant- petitioners in 2002 itself, but written-statement was not filed on their behalf in spite of number of opportunities granted to them and the same was filed only on 25th March, 2004. The learned trial court, vide its order dated 6th September, 2004, directed that the written-statement was filed after expiry of period of limitation of 90 days, therefore, the same will not be kept on the record, meaning thereby the written-statement of the defendant- petitioners was closed. The said order is under challenge in this writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the suit was filed in the year 2001 when the CPC (Amendment) // 2 // Act of 2002 was not in force, therefore, the provisions relating to limitation of 90 days for filing the written-statement were not applicable and, in these circumstances, the trial court committed an illegality in passing the impugned order, which is liable to be set-aside. The learned counsel for the respondents contended that even if the provisions of the CPC (Amendment) Act of 2002 were not applicable in 2002, still there is delay of about three years in filing the written-statement, therefore, the trial court has not committed any illegality in passing the impugned order and closing the written-statement of the defendants, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. The suit was filed on 29th September, 2001 and even as per admission of the learned counsel for the petitioners the summons of the suit were served on the defendant-petitioners in 2002 itself, but no written-statement was filed immediately and it was filed after a delay of more than two years. However, I am of the view that the right of filing of written-statement by defendants is a valuable right, which should not be denied normally. The defendant-petitioners have already filed written-statement on 25th March, 2004, therefore, I think it fit and proper to direct the trial court to take the same on the record. So far as the delay of proceedings on account of delay in filing the written-statement is concerned, the same could have been compensated by awarding costs and, in these circumstances, // 3 // I think it fit and proper to award costs on the defendant- petitioners of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only). Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 6th September, 2004, passed by the trial court, is set- aside. The written-statement filed by the defendant-petitioners is ordered to be taken on the record on payment of costs of Rs.3,000/- which will be paid by the defendant-petitioners to the plaintiff-respondents on or before 7th July, 2008, with the clear understanding that in case the amount of costs is not paid on or before the aforesaid date then the writ petition will be deemed to have been dismissed and the written-statement of the defendant- petitioners will not be taken on the record and no further opportunity will be granted in this regard to the defendants. So far as this writ petition is concerned, the costs is made easy. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman// // 4 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No.225/2005 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.245/2005 Jaswant S/o Shri Ramavtar and Others Versus Civil Judge (Jr.Div.) & Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Behror, District Alwar and Others Date of Order ::: 22.05.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri H.P. Singh, Counsel for petitioners Shri Ashok Bansal, Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- In view of the order passed in the writ petition itself, the stay application, filed therewith, also stands disposed of. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman//