Rules of the High Court at Calcutta (Original Side), 1914 – Chapter XXXVIII r.46, Chapter IX rr.2, 35, Chapter X r.27 – Filing of written statement – Power to extend time, after a considerable delay:
Held: Power to extend time for filing written statement should not be employed as a matter of course, but with great caution so that the purpose of the procedural statute is not defeated and unscrupulous litigants do not abuse the process of the Court by adopting dilatory tactis – However, the same cannot be examined in a strait-jacket compartment for the peculiar facts and circumstances of every case have to be carefully and individually appreciated – Thereafter, the concerned Court would take a call as to whether the request made is genuine or, whether refusal to accede to such request may lead to eventual miscarriage of justice – Procedural technicalities have to give way to substantive justice – Procedure, well and truly, is only the handmaiden of justice – Discretion granted to Courts has to be exercised on a case-specific basis – Sequence of events clearly indicates that the respondent cannot be said to be solely at fault since it was under the impression that the suit already stood disposed of and thus, there was no requirement/occasion to file the written statement – Case was listed suddenly after a prolonged gap of 17 years, in 2017, whereafter the respondent filed an appropriate application – Moreover, the reports submitted by the Registry of the High Court indicated that the official website of the High Court states that the suit had been disposed of in 2000, and; the High Court could not, for reasons best known to it alone, trace out any orders in the file of the suit pre-2017 – Situation that prevailed is a direct result of the confusion created by the Registry of High Court – It would be improper to not permit the taking on record of the written statement of the respondent apropos the suit – Thus, discretion rightly exercised by the Division Bench in favour of the respondent. [Paras 15-17]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.