- (1.) This revisional application is directed against the order no. 15 dated September 09, 2016 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Barasat, District 24 Parganas (North) in Matrimonial Suit No. 177 of 2014, by which an application for extension of time to file written statement is rejected and the suit was fixed at the ex parte board. It is observed by the Trial Court that the petitioner filed the written statement on 28th June, 2016 and the date was fixed for acceptance thereof.
(2.) According to the wife/opposite party, the summon was served on 3rd August, 2015 but the petitioner did not appear to contest the said suit by filing the written statement within the statutory period provided therefor. However, in the written objection the wife took a different stand, as according to her, the summons was served on 9th January, 2015 at Chandannagore address and was again served on 19th January, 2015 at Purbachal address. The Trial Court proceeded in declining to accept the written statement, as both the parties are medical practitioner and are educated.
(3.) The Trial Court was more swayed by certain statements made by the husband, which appears to the learned Judge to be false. The learned Judge was very much annoyed when he noticed the statement that the suit is not filed by the respondent/husband after seeing that the same was filed by him. It is not in dispute that even after the amendment having brought to the provisions under Order VIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the said provision is not mandatory but directory in nature. In deserving cases the Court can extend the time for filing the written statement.;