[2025:RJ-JP:26686] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10600/2025 1. Radheyshyam Nayak S/o Gheesaram, R/o Village Morija, Tehsil Chomu District Jaipur (Since Deceased) Through 1/1. Lalchand Nayak S/o Late Shri Radheyshyam Nayak, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Ward No. 17, Opposite Sewayatan Hospital, Kasba Chomu, Tehsil Chomu, District Jaipur. ----Petitioners Versus 1. Smt. Rampyari W/o Shri Muktilal Dhebana, Aged About 87 Years, R/o Plot No. 20, Jay Shri Nagar, Opposite Road No. 14, Sikar Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan 2. Babli Devi W/o Shri Gajanand Bunkar, R/o Village Bhishanpura Charanwas, Tehsil Chomu, District Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sharma with Ms. Kamini Pareek & Mr. Jitendra Choudhary HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 17 /07/2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner No.1/1 assailing the order dated 26.05.2025 passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Chomu, Distt. Jaipur, in Civil Suit No. 02/2017, whereby the application filed by the petitioner No.1/1 under Section 151 C.P.C. seeking permission to file written statement, was rejected. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner No.1/1 submits that on 18.04.2023, the present petitioner was brought on record as the legal representative of the deceased original petitioner, namely [2025:RJ-JP:26686] (2 of 2) [CW-10600/2025] Radheyshyam Nayak. It is further contended that due to circumstances beyond control, the newly impleaded legal representative could not file the written statement within time, and his opportunity to file the written statement was consequently closed vide order dated 15.07.2024. It is, therefore, prayed that one more opportunity may be granted to file the written statement in order to enable proper and complete adjudication of the matter. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 4. Upon perusal of the material on record and bearing in mind the principles of natural justice and the overarching need to decide the cases on merits, rather than on technicalities, this Court is of the view that denial of opportunity to the newly impleaded petitioner No.1/1 to file a written statement would result in grave prejudice and defeat the cause of substantive justice. 5. Accordingly, the present civil writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 26.05.2025 passed by the learned Trial Court, is quashed and set aside. The petitioner No.1/1 is granted one more opportunity to file the written statement before the learned Trial Court. 6. The learned Trial Court shall proceed with the suit thereafter in accordance with law. 7. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J SAHIL SONI /28