Court allows 58-day delay in filing written statement, imposes costs on petitioner, and mandates trial conclusion within 10 months.
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court at Aurangabad has allowed the condonation of a 58-day delay in filing a written statement by Narayan Dattarao Sontakke in a partition suit against his step-brother, Nagnath Dattarao Sontakke. The court emphasized the necessity for both parties to crystallize their rights in partition suits, where each party stands in the position of a plaintiff.
The judgment was delivered by Justice Ajit B. Kadethankar, who noted the advanced age of both parties, with the plaintiff being approximately 80 years old and the defendant nearing the same age. The case involves a dispute over the partition and separate possession of family property, with proceedings originally initiated in 2016.
The High Court overturned the previous decision by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Gangakhed, which had denied the condonation of delay due to lack of sufficient cause. Justice Kadethankar highlighted that executing a decree without the defendant's pleadings could prolong litigation and lead to technical complications.
Acknowledging the nature of partition suits, the court stated that these disputes require detailed examination of both parties' claims to ensure justice is served. The court also took into account the practical challenges in executing decrees in such suits, particularly given the ages and circumstances of the involved parties.
The court ruled that the writ petition filed by Narayan Dattarao Sontakke should be allowed, but imposed a cost of Rs. 15,000 on the petitioner for the delay and associated latches. The trial court has been directed to conclude the proceedings within 10 months to expedite the resolution of the case.
Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. J. M. Murkute, assured the court that the petitioner would not seek adjournments and would adhere strictly to the trial issues. Meanwhile, counsel for the respondent, Mr. S. N. Lavekar, while opposing the petition, suggested imposing heavy costs should the court decide in favor of condonation.
This decision underscores the court's commitment to ensuring timely justice while balancing procedural rigors with the practical realities faced by litigants, especially in cases involving family disputes and elderly parties.
Bottom Line:
Condonation of delay in filing the written statement in partition suit between step-brothers allowed considering the nature of litigation, advanced age of parties, practical difficulties in executing decree, and to ensure proper adjudication of rights.
Statutory provision(s):
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Order 8, Rule 1
