AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S. Abdul Nazeer, J.—The Petitioner is live Plaintiff in O.S. No. 165/2005 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.). Ramanagar and the Respondents are the Defendants. The Plaintiff filed the aforesaid suit for declaration that the sale deed dated 28.2.2005 obtained by the 1st Respondent from the Plaintiff is null and void and for certain other reliefs.
The Defendants did not file their written statements within the period prescribed. There was delay of about 605 days in filing the written statement by the 1st Defendants and 117 days in filing the written statement by the 2nd Respondent Therefore, Defendant. Nos. 1 and 2 tiled the applications I.A. Nos. 5 and 6 seeking condonation of delay in filing the written statement. The court below has allowed the said applications by its order dated 14.12.2010 and permitted the Defendants to file the written statement on payment of cost of Rs. . 500/- each. The Petitioner/Plaintiff has called in question the validity of the said order in these writ petitions.
Learned Counsel for the Petitioner would contend that the Defendants have not assigned any justifiable reasons for the delay in filing the written statements. The applications were opposed by the Plaintiff by filing objections. The court below has allowed the applications without assigning any reasons. In this connection, he has relied on the decision of the Apex Court in Mohammed Yusuf Vs. Faij Mohammad and Others, .
On the other hand, learned Counsel for the Respondents have sought to justify the impugned order.
The 1st Defendant has filed the application I.A. No. 6 seeking condonation of delay in filing the written statement. In the affidavit filed in support of the application, he has stated that he had to collect materials for filing the written statement. There were certain criminal complaints regarding teachers'' scam. He could not get complete information in respect of the said cases. He has further stated that certain complaints were also filed against him by the Plaintiff in respect of the sale of the suit schedule property before the various authorities including the complaint before the State of Karnataka. Department of Revenue as also the Inspector General of Stamps and Registration. He could not secure proper information from the authorities concerned in this regard. The 2nd Defendant, has filed I.A. No. 5 seeking condonation of delay of 117 days filing the written statement. In the affidavit filed in support of the application he has stated that after service of summons, he had to correspond with the higher authorities before filing the written statement
Having perused the affidavits filed in support of the applications, I am satisfied that the reasons assigned for the delay in filing the written statement are just and reasonable. The apex court in Mohammed Yusuf''s case (supra) has held that the Defendant may be permitted to file written statement only in exceptional cases. As stated above, the Defendants have assigned cogent reasons for the delay. There is no merit in these writ petitions. They are accordingly dismissed. No costs.