1 2025:CGHC:53735 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 654 of 2023 1 - Girdhari S/o. Late Shri Dhaniram, Aged About 57 Years R/o. Village - Nirtu, Ward No. 19, Tehsil - Takhatpur, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. (Defendant) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Nilesh Kumar Jaiswal S/o. Late Shri Basant Lal Jaiswal, Aged About 40 Years R/o. Vivekanand Colony, Mopka, Tehsil - Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. (Appellant) 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rohit Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vedant Shadangi, P. L. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput) Order on Board 03/11/2025 1. The challenge in this writ petition is to an order dated 20.07.2023, passed by 10th Additional District Judge, Bilaspur (CG) in Civil Suit No.98A/ 2022 by which the right to file the written statement of the petitioner/ defendant was closed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although sufficient opportunity was granted by learned trial Court to file a written statement, the same could not be filed as the case of petitioner was being looked after by his counsel, who never informed him regarding the filing of the written statement. As the written statement was not filed, the petitioner has changed his counsel and a vakalatnama on behalf of the new 2 counsel has been filed, which is also reflected from the order-sheet dated 04.05.2023. Even thereafter, the earlier counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner and sought time for filing the written statement. He submits that the respondent No.1/ plaintiff has filed a suit for specific performance of a contract in respect of the properties held by the petitioner. He submits that if the petitioner is not granted an opportunity to counter the allegations in the plaint, it would cause great prejudice and irreparable loss to the petitioner. He placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of Laxmikant and Others Vs. Bisni Bai and Others reported in 2024 SCC Online CHH 6583 and also decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dwarika Prasad (D) thr. Vs. Prithvi Raj Singh reported in 2024 INSC 1030 and in the case of Desh Raj Vs. Balkishan (Dead) through proposed legal representative MS Rohini reported in (2020) 2 SCC 708. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the dispute is between the private parties the State has no role to play. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. Though respondent No.1 is not represented, this Court, however, on 14.08.2023 stayed the further proceeding of the civil suit and the interim order is continued till date. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that sufficient opportunity on 14 occasions was given to the petitioner to file a written statement, despite which the written statement could not be filed. Perusal of the order dated 04.05.2023 indicates that another counsel was engaged by the petitioner to represent him. It appears that earlier counsel continued to appear on next occasions also. Of course, sufficient opportunities were granted to the petitioner, but as the suit for specific performance of contract has been filed by respondent No.1, and if the petitioner has not been granted an opportunity to contest the same, it may cause great prejudice and irreparable loss to the petitioner. Mere filing of the written statement would not ipso facto lead to the dismissal of the civil suit filed by respondent No.1, rather it may help the learned trial Court to adjudicate the dispute between the parties on its own merits. At the same time this Court cannot ignore the fact that on account of 3 lackadaisical approach of the petitioner, the respondent No.1/ plaintiff should not also suffer. Therefore, considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice, a further 15 days’ time is granted from the next date of hearing of the civil suit for the petitioner/ defendant to file written statement, subject to the payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- to respondent No.1/ plaintiff. 6. With this observation, this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) JUDGE Parul PARUL MITTAL Digitally signed by PARUL MITTAL Date: 2025.11.06 15:58:53 +0530