[2025:RJ-JP:2684] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15287/2016 1. Smt. Santosh Devi Wife Of Late Shri Gajanand 2. Rahul Son Of Late Shri Gajanand 3. Ashish Son Of Late Shri Gajanand, All By Caste Kumawat, Resident Of Sain Colony, Near Barodia Basti, Behind Panchayati Dharamshala, Jaipur Rajasthan ----Petitioners Versus 1. Bhanwar Lal Kumawat Son Of Shri Srinarayan Kumawat, By Caste Kumawat, Sawai Madhopur Rajasthan 2. Tejkumar Son Of Shri Srinarain, By Caste Kumawat, Near Khasa Kothi Bazaria, Sawai Madhopur Rajasthan 3. Navin Chand Son Of Shri Srinarain, By Caste Kumawat, Gagan Cinema Phulera, District Jaipur Rajasthan ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Saransh Saini For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma Mr. S.N. Kumawat Mr. Dharmendra Pareek HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order 20/01/2025 This civil writ petition has been filed by the petitioners- defendants (for short ‘the defendants’) against the order dated 28.09.2016 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sawai Madhopur whereby the trial Court dismissed the application filed by the defendants. They have also challenged the order dated 10.01.2006 passed by the trial court whereby defendants’ opportunity to file written statement has been closed. [2025:RJ-JP:2684] (2 of 3) [CW-15287/2016] Learned counsel for the defendants submits that the respondent No.1-plaintiff (for short ‘the plaintiff’) filed a suit for partition wherein the defendants put in appearance through their counsel before the trial court on 15.10.2005. Due to unavoidable circumstances, the defendants could not file the written statement and the trial court vide order dated 10.01.2006 closed the defendants’ opportunity to file the written statement. Thereafter, defendants filed an application for opening the opportunity to file written statement but the trial Court vide order dated 28.09.2016 dismissed the same. He has prayed that the orders dated 10.01.2006 and 28.09.2016 passed by the trial court be set aside and the defendants may be granted an opportunity to file the written statement. Learned counsel for the respondents have opposed the same and submitted that after closing the defendants’ opportunity to file the written statement, the application under Order 8 Rule 1 read with Section 151 CPC was filed after an inordinate delay, therefore, the trial Court has rightly dismissed the application. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material on record. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice I deem it just and proper to grant an opportunity to defendants to file the written statement. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the order dated 28.09.2016 passed by the trial Court dismissing the defendants’ application and the order dated 10.01.2006 qua closing the defendants’ opportunity to file written statement are set aside and trial court is directed to grant an opportunity to the defendants to [2025:RJ-JP:2684] (3 of 3) [CW-15287/2016] file written statement, subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- by the defendants to the plaintiff on or before the next date of hearing, failing which no opportunity shall be granted by the trial Court to the defendants to file the written statement. In view of the fact that the suit was filed in the year 2005 and more than 19 years have been passed therefrom, the trial court is directed to decide the suit, if pending before it, expeditiously in accordance with law. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s), disposed of. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Ritu/97