- (1.) It is an admitted position that since in spite of service of writ of summons the defendant failed to file its written statement within time, the suit was heard as an undefended suit. However, the defendant by making its application had sought for permission of the Court to file its written statement but no such permission was granted first by the trial Court and then by the appeal Court and eventually by the Supreme Court by their respective orders and the final order of such rejection of the Supreme Court was made on 23rd November, 2007.
(2.) The suit thereafter appeared for hearing before me and I allowed the plaintiff to lead and adduce its evidence for the purpose of proving its case could have disposed of the suit by passing the decree under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure as the suit, as aforesaid, remained undefended . and the plaintiff as such was entitled to obtain the relief it claimed in the suit.
(3.) However, when the plaintiff was adducing evidence in Court, the defendant or rather its learned senior counsel had sought for leave to cross- examine the plaintiffs witness or witnesses though the defendant was not in a position to defend the suit in absence of its written statement as the defendant, as aforesaid, was not permitted to defend by its written statement.;