[2025:RJ-JP:252] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10079/2024 Smt. Gopali Devi W/o Shri Nandkishore Katta, Aged About 89 Years, R/o Jat Ke Kunwe Ka Rasta, Chandpole, Jaipur (Wrong Address Mentioned In The Suit). Correct Address- 162, Grenade Marg, Pratap Nagar, Khatipura, Road, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan).302021. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Shri Kailash Narayan Jhalani S/o Late Shri Radhaballabh Jhalani, Aged About 82 Years, R/o 304, Vinayak Apartment, Sardar Patel Marg, Jaipur. 2. Shri Jagdish Narayan Jhalani S/o Late Shri Radhaballabh Jhalani(Deceased), R/o B-49, Ganesh Marg, Bapu Nagar, Jaipur. 2/1. Smt. Ramjanki W/o Shri Jagdish Narayan Jhalani (Deceased), R/o B-49, Ganesh Marg, Bapu Nagar, Jaipur. 2/2. Shri Anand Bihari Jhalani S/o Shri Jagdish Narayan Jhalani, R/o B-49, Ganesh Marg, Bapu Nagar, Jaipur. 2/3. Shri Vipin Bihari Jhalani S/o Shri Jagdish Narayan Jhalani, R/o B-49, Ganesh Marg, Bapu Nagar, Jaipur. 3. Shri Chand Jhalani S/o Late Shri Durgaprasad Ji Jhalani, Aged About 69 Years, R/o 10, Sindhu Marine Drive, Mumbai. 4. Shri Satyanarayan S/o Late Shri Radhaballabh Jhalani, Aged About 83 Years, R/o 304, Vinayak Apartment, Sardar Patel Marg, Jaipur. 5. Smt. Bimla Devi W/o Shri Raman Khandelwal (Deceased), R/o Transport Nagar, Lashkar Bwalior, Opposite High Court Building. 5/1. Sanjay Khandelwal S/o Shri Raman Khandelwal, Aged About 57 Years, R/o 202, Ramkamal Heights, Alkapuri, City Centre, Gwalior (Mp). 5/2. Nitin Khandelwal S/o Shri Raman Khandelwal, Aged About 53 Years, R/o 439A, Behind The Greater Brijwasi, Jmb Sweets, Goyal Nagar, Indore (Mp). 6. Shri Ashok S/o Late Shri Durgaprasad Ji, Aged About 48 Years, R/o 10, Kintu Marine Drive, Mumbai. [2025:RJ-JP:252] (2 of 4) [CW-10079/2024] 7. Shri Ramesh S/o Late Shri Durga Prasad Ji, Aged About 42 Years, R/o 10, Sindhu Mari Drive, Mumbai ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A. K. Bajpai, Senior Counsel with Mr. Nitesh Pareek, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. M. M. Ranjan, Senior Counsel with Mr. Yashwardhan Tolani, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Mishra, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order 03/01/2025 This Civil Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner- defendant No.4 (for short 'the defendant') against the order dated 07.03.2024 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge No.2, Jaipur Metropolitan-First in Civil Suit No.09/2007, whereby the trial court dismissed the application filed by the defendant under Order 8 Rule 1 CPC and returned the written statement and counter claim filed by the defendant. Learned counsel for the defendant submits that respondent No.1-plaintiff (for short 'the plaintiff') filed a suit for partition of Joint Hindu Family Property against the defendants in which summon was never served upon the defendant and she never engaged the Advocate-Sumit Marwal. Learned counsel for the defendant also submits that Advocate-Sumit Marwal wrongly appeared on her behalf. So, she did not have any knowledge regarding pendency of the present suit and her opportunity to file written statement was closed on 01.07.2008. She got knowledge of the present suit in the year 2022. So, she filed an application before the trial court for taking the written statement as well as [2025:RJ-JP:252] (3 of 4) [CW-10079/2024] counter claim on record but trial court vide order dated 07.03.2024 dismissed the application filed by the defendant. Learned counsel for the defendant also submits that non- appearance of the defendant was bona-fide as she did not have any knowledge regarding pendency of the suit and never engaged the Advocate-Sumit Marwal. So, in the interest of justice, order of the trial court be set aside and written statement with counter claim filed by her be taken on record. Learned counsel for the respondent(s) have opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the defendant and submits that suit was filed in the year 2007. Defendant was very well represented by her Advocate and she had not filed written statement within the stipulated period. Resultantly, trial court closed her opportunity to file written statement on 01.07.2008. The said order was not challenged by the defendant. Defendant had filed an application after a lapse of 15 years. So, trial court rightly dismissed the application filed by the defendant. So, present petition be dismissed. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the defendant as well as learned counsel for the respondent(s). It is an admitted position that in the present suit, defendant was represented by her Advocate-Sumit Marwal. He filed memo of appearance on her behalf before the trial court on 09.03.2007 and obtained certified copy of the suit. Since then, she had not filed the written statement. Resultantly, trial court had closed the opportunity to file the written statement on 01.07.2008. The said order was never challenged by the defendant. The present [2025:RJ-JP:252] (4 of 4) [CW-10079/2024] application filed by the defendant after a lapse of 15 years. So, in my considered opinion, trial court had not committed any error in dismissing the application was filed by the defendant. So, present petition being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) dismissed. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Jatin /10