GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS,J. - (1.) In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing order dated 21.02.2011, Annex. 7 which is passed upon application filed under Section 148, C.P.C. and prayed that application filed under Section 148, C.P.C. may be allowed and written-statement may be ordered to be taken on record.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although suit was filed against the defendant-petitioner in the year 2001, service of summons issued to him was effected upon him and his counsel appeared on 25.09.2001 and filed power on behalf of the defendant-petitioner. But, thereafter, time and again, for other reasons, the matter remained pending, therefore, due to said reason written-statement was not filed within the time limit prescribed; but, in the interest of justice, now, written-statement filed by the defendant-petitioner may be ordered to be taken on record.
(3.) In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention towards judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Salem Advocate Bar Association, Tamil Nadu v. Union of India, reported in 2005 (2) WLC (SC) Civil 242, in which, it has been held by the apex Court that Provisions of Order 8 Rule 1 are directory in nature and not mandatory, therefore, prayer of the petitioner may be accepted and trial Court may be directed to take the written-statement on record.;