Court No. 6 (265719) 15.09.2026 (AD 4) (S. Banerjee) CO 3061 of 2026 Dr. Saurav Bose Vs. Smt. Satabdi Mitra Mr. Dibyendu Chatterjee Ms. Jhuma Chakraborty Mr. Mainak Singha Burman Mr. Mehnaz Rahaman …for the petitioner This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the husband and is directed against an order being no. 26 dated May 16, 2026 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 8th Court at Alipore in Mat Suit No. 251 of 2024. By the order impugned the written statement by the wife/opposite-party herein filed belatedly was accepted and the order fixing the suit for ex parte hearing was set aside subject to payment of cost. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the wife/opposite-party could not give any satisfactory explanation for acceptance of the written statement beyond the stipulated timeframe. He further submits that the written statement filed belatedly was accepted mechanically. 2 Learned trial judge took note of the fact that the wife/opposite-party herein entered appearance in the suit by filing a Vakalatnama on May 16, 2024 and prayed for time to file the written statement. The wife- opposite-party herein was also granted several adjournments for filing her written statement and on July 19, 2025 the learned trial judge fixed the suit for ex parte hearing as the wife/opposite-party herein did not file the written statement in spite of several opportunities. However, the learned trial judge after considering the cause shown by the wife/opposite- party herein for belated filing of the written statement was satisfied that the wife/opposite-party herein had the intention to contest the suit and the learned trial judge was of the view that an opportunity should be granted to the wife/opposite-party herein to contest the suit for proper determination of the dispute involved in the matrimonial suit. The learned trial judge also considered the issue of imposition of cost as a condition precedent but taking note of the fact that the status of wife/opposite-party herein is that of a wife and also that a woman cannot take it for granted that merely because of her status she can cause delay in filing of written statement, imposed a token amount of cost. The learned trial judge in exercise of its discretion accepted the cause shown by the wife/opposite-party herein for belated filing of the 3 written statement and for vacating the ex party hearing of the suit by assigning cogent reason in support thereof. This Court is not inclined to interfere with such exercise of discretion while exercising powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as the exercise of the discretion in favour of the defendant was to enable the wife to contest the matrimonial suit. For all the reasons as aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order impugned. At this stage Mr. Chatterjee, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the hearing of the matrimonial suit be expedited. In view of the order now sought and proposed to be passed, this Court feels that there is no necessity to direct issuance of any notice upon the opposite party. However, the learned advocate-on-record of the petitioner shall be obliged to forward a copy of this application along with a server copy of this order, upon the opposite party or upon the learned advocate representing the opposite party before the learned trial judge forthwith. The learned trial judge shall make an endeavour to dispose of Mat Suit No. 251 of 2024 as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, 4 provided the petitioner is not in default in complying with any order passed by a competent court directing payment of alimony pendente lite or maintenance. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)