DWARKA PRASAD SON OF LATE SHRI SITARAM VS DURGALAL SON OF LATE SHRI SITARAM

Background

The petitioner sought to set aside an order that condoned the delay in filing defendant No. 3's written statement under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC in a non-commercial suit.

Issues before the Court

• Whether the delay in filing the written statement under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC in a non-commercial suit could be condoned.

Court held

The Rajasthan High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Trial Court's order condoning the delay.

Ratio / legal principle

In non-commercial suits, the timeline under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC is directory and delay may be condoned on sufficient explanation assessed flexibly, provided there is no ex parte order, forfeiture, or substantial prejudice caused.

Key points

• The case involves a non-commercial suit.
• No ex parte order or forfeiture existed at the time.
• Proceedings were pending and no substantial prejudice was caused.
• The Trial Court's order condoning the delay was found to be lawful.

Why it matters

This judgment clarifies the discretionary nature of the timeline for filing written statements in non-commercial suits under the Code of Civil Procedure, reinforcing that trial courts may condone delays when sufficient cause is shown and no substantial prejudice results.

Acts / sections identified

Topics