Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010098202025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/181/2025 MARAMI BEGUM D/O NUR HUSSAIN, W/O JAKIR HUSSAIN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BHELAMARI, PO NIZ DHAMDHAMA, PS GHOGRAPAR, DIST NALBARI, ASSAM 781349 VERSUS JAKIR HUSSAIN S/O ISLAM ALI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KHATIKUCHI, PO KHATIKUCHI, PS GHOGRAPAR, DIST NALBARI, ASSAM 781369 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B CHOWDHURY, MR. A ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER Date : 23.05.2025 Heard Mr. B Chowdhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. In this petition, under article 227 of the Constitution of India r/w Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the petitioner has challenged the correctness Page No.# 2/3 otherwise of the order, dated 27.02.2025, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Nalbari. It has been stated here that vide impugned order dated 27.02.2025, learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Nalbari has dismissed the petition No. 87 of 2024 filed by the petitioner for allowing some time to file written statement as the written statement could not be submitted on that day by the present petitioner. Mr. B Chowdhury, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the respondent in the Matrimonial Suit (D) 199 of 2024 and the said Matrimonial Suit was instituted by her husband. The petitioner has received summon from the learned Family Court, Nalbari on 22.10.2024 and as such, she ought to have filed the written statement on 22.01.2025, but, she could not consult her counsel on time. Therefore, she could not file the written statement before the learned Trial Court. As such, Mr. B Chowdhury, learned counsel submits that the petitioner herein, may be given one chance to contest the said matrimonial proceeding before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Nalbari by filing her written statement. Having heard the submission of learned counsel for both the parties, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and also perused the impugned order dated 27.02.2025. It is well-settled that the rule of filing written statement within 90 days is not an inflexible rule. On sufficient grounds being shown, the Court may extend the same beyond 90 days (Reference in this context can be made to a decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in – Salem Advocates Bar Association, Tamil Nadu v. Union of India, reported in (2005) 6 SCC 344. In the case in hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner could not consult her lawyer within time for which she could not file the written statement within the stipulated period of 90 days. And taking note of the Page No.# 3/3 submission made by Mr. B Chowdhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and also considering the facts and circumstances of the record, this Court is inclined to allow this petition. The impugned order dated 27.02.2025 stands set-aside and quashed. Consequent upon the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Nalbari shall accept the written statement filed by the petitioner and to proceed with the suit, in accordance with law. However, the petitioner has to deposit a sum of Rs 2000/- being the cost, before the District Legal Service Committee, Nalbari, before the date fixed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant