Biswanth Shah and 2 Ors v. Bajrang Agarwal @ Hanuman Agarwal

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010138482024 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oCRP(IO)/231/2024o BISWANTHoSHAHoANDo2oORSo SONoOFoLATEoGOKULoSHAHoBANIYAo@oGOKULoCHARNIYA,o RESIDENToOFoPACHAGARH,o FAKIRAGRAM,oWARDoNO.o-6,o P.O.oANDoP.S.-oFAKIRAGRAM,o DISTRICT-oKOKRAJHAR,oPIN-o783345,o ASSAM. 2:oRAMNATHoSHAH oSONoOFoLATEoGOKULoSHAHoBANIYAo@oGOKULoCHARNIYA o RESIDENToOFoPACHAGARH o FAKIRAGRAM oWARDoNO.o-6 o P.O.oANDoP.S.-oFAKIRAGRAM o DISTRICT-oKOKRAJHAR oPIN-o783345 o ASSAM. 3:oADITYAoSHAH oSONoOFoSHIUoNATHoSHAH o RESIDENToOFoPACHAGARH o FAKIRAGRAM oWARDoNO.o-6 o P.O.oANDoP.S.-oFAKIRAGRAM o DISTRICT-oKOKRAJHAR Page No.# 2/3 PIN-783345

ASSAM VERSUS BAJRANG AGARWAL @ HANUMAN AGARWAL SON OF LATE FULCHAND AGARWAL, RESIDENT OF PACHAGARH, FAKIRAGRAM, WARD NO. -6, P.O. AND P.S.- FAKIRAGRAM, DISTRICT-KOKRAJHAR, PIN-783345, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A IKBAL Advocate for the Respondent :

:: BEFORE :: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

O R D E R

17.07.2024 Heard Mr. A. Ikbal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.

¶2This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure challenging the impugned order dated 15.06.2024 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Kokrajhar in Title Suit No.15/2024.

¶3By the impugned order, the learned trial court refused to grant time to the defendants/ petitioners to file the written statement because the 90 days time as mandated by Order 8 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure had elapsed.

¶4I have considered the submissions of Mr. Ikbal. I have also gone through the impugned order.

¶5Procedures are handmaid of justice. Moreover, it is a settled position of law, that the Page No.# 3/3 period of 90 days as mandated by Order 8 Rule 1 of the CPC is not mandatory rather it is directory.

¶6Therefore, the courts should exercise judicial mind in a positive manner.

¶7I find that the learned trial court has not exercised the judicial mind in a positive way.

¶8The impugned order is bad in law and stands set aside.

¶9The learned trial court is directed to accept the written statement filed by the petitioners/defendants. With the aforesaid direction, the revision petition stands disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant