RITU RAJ AWASTHI,J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records.
(2.) This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 9.4.2015 passed in Original Suit No. 08 of 2012; Asharfi Lal v. Sinda Devi and others as well as the order dated 7.7.2015 passed in the revision whereby the learned trial court has ordered for proceeding ex parte against the petitioner/defendant and fixed the date for evidence. The revision preferred against the said order has been dismissed.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner tried to submit that the period of 30 days as provided under Order 8, Rule 1 CPC is not mandatory in case there are cogent reasons for the delay in filing of the written statements, the Court can extent the period and permit the defendant to file written statements. It is also submitted that there were some cogent reasons in not filing the written statements within time, however the said reasons have not been considered by the trial court while passing the impugned orders dated 6.8.2013 as well as 9.4.2015.;