Anantnarayan And Others vs Suresh And Others

Pranay Verma, J

By this petition preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have challenged the order dated 15.09.2023 passed by the trial Court whereby their right to file the written statement as well as reply to the injunction application filed by the plaintiffs has been closed. The petitioners have also challenged the order dated 16.04.2024 passed by the trial Court whereby their application under Section 151 of the CPC for taking the written statement and the reply to the injunction application on record has been rejected.

A perusal of the impugned order dated 16.04.2024 shows that the application under Section 151 of the CPC dated 22.09.2023 filed by the petitioners has been rejected by observing that by way of the same the petitioners are seeking review of order dated 15.09.2023 which is impermissible. The trial Court has not adverted to the reasons as had been ascribed by the petitioners in their application.

Earlier the right of the petitioners to file their written statement and reply to injunction application was closed. Thereafter they filed an application for taking the written statement and the reply on record. Therein they had given reasons as to why the written statement and reply could not be filed by them earlier. They were seeking exercise of inherent power of the trial Court to take the written statement and reply on record. In the strict sense they were not seeking review of the earlier order. Even if the trial Court had earlier closed the right of the petitioners, then also it was open for it to have taken the written statement and reply on record exercising inherent powers provided that sufficient cause for the same had been shown.

The observation of the trial Court that allowing the application of petitioners would amount to review of the previous order is erroneous. Moreover even if the petitioners were seeking review of the earlier order and permission to file the written statement and reply, there was no prohibition for the petitioners in doing so since review jurisdiction has specifically been provided for in the Code of Civil Procedure itself and the trial Court very much has the power to review the earlier order subject to the limitations of power of review. Rejection of application of petitioners on ground that review of earlier order is not permissible is hence unsustainable.

As a result of the aforesaid discussion, the impugned order dated 16.04.2024 passed by the trial Court is hereby set aside and it is directed to decide the application dated 22.09.2023 (Annexure P/2) of the petitioners under Section 151 of the CPC on its own merits.

The petition is accordingly disposed off, however without expressing any opinion on merits of the application preferred by the petitioners.