SAFIYA KHATUN Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(GAU)-2018-11-138
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Decided on November 16,2018

Safiya Khatun Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

PRASANTA KUMAR DEKA, J. - (1.) Heard Mr. AI Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. P Baruah, learned counsel representing respondent no. 1; Mr. UK Nair, learned Senior Counsel representing respondent nos. 4 to 8; Mr. AI Ali, learned counsel representing respondent no. 2 and Mr. G Taye, learned counsel representing respondent no. 3.
(2.) Order dated 03.08.2018 passed by the Foreigners' Tribunal 3rd at Nagaon in FT Case No. 1280/2016 is put under challenge. The petitioner who is the proceedee in FT Case No. 1280/2016 in the aforesaid Tribunal filed her written statement on 06.09.2017. The matter was fixed for further evidence. The evidence of official witness was also adduced. Since 31.10.2017 the proceeding is pending for further evidence. On 03.08.2018 the petitioner filed petition No. 2071/2018 thereby seeking the leave of the Tribunal to file additional written statement and also sought for amendment of the Paragraph-4 of the written statement already on record. The said petition was rejected vide the impugned order dated 03.08.2018. Considered the submission of the learned counsel. It is seen that while rejecting the petition No. 2071/2018 the Tribunal held that under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) no amendment in written statement is permissible after commencement of trial and accordingly, the petitioner was rejected. We would like to mention that there is no application of order VI Rule 17 of the CPC in a proceeding before the Tribunal. The limited application of the provisions of the CPC is prescribed under Section 4 of the Foreigners' (Tribunals) Order, 1964. Thus, we are of the view that the Tribunal exercised a wrong jurisdiction while rejecting the said petition No. 2071/2018 and the impugned order dated 3.8.2018 is set aside.
(3.) The Tribunal shall allow the petitioner to file the additional written statement which is annexed to this writ petition purportedly made ready on 24.07.2018. It is specifically mentioned that except allowing to file the additional written statement of the petitioner which is annexed as annexure in this writ petition, the Tribunal shall not allow the petitioner to amend the written statement which is already on record. After acceptance of the additional written statement the proceeding shall be brought to its logical conclusion within a period of 30 days from the date thereof. The said additional written statement shall be filed immediately on the next date fixed by the Tribunal. Failure to file the additional written statement on the date so fixed by the Tribunal, no further chance be given to the petitioner to file additional written statement and to that effect, the Tribunal shall pass necessary order(s). This writ petition stands allowed with the aforesaid direction.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.