S. Chandrashekhar, J. - (1.) Aggrieved by order dated 01.08.2013 in Title Suit No. 137 of 2011 whereby, the trial court has declined to take the written statement filed by the defendants/petitioners herein on record, the present writ petition has been filed. Title Suit No. 137 of 2011 was filed by the respondents for declaration of right, title and interest over the Schedule -A property and for confirmation of their possession over the same. The defendants were served summon on 27.05.2012 and they appeared on 30.08.2012. A written statement was filed on 10.09.2012 along with an application under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act. The petitioners filed application under Order VIII, Rule 1 read with Sec. 151, CPC on 04.04.2013 for taking the written statement dated 10.09.2012, on record. However, the same has been rejected vide impugned order dated 01.08.2013.
(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners, due to non -availability of necessary documents, could not submit the written statement in time however, the same was filed on 10.09.2012 along with an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the written statement. The provision under Order VIII, Rule 1, CPC confers discretion upon the court to accept the written statement even beyond the statutory period however, the learned trial court without recording a cogent reason for not accepting the written statement has rejected the application dated 04.04.2013, erroneously.
(3.) Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents supports the impugned order dated 01.08.2013 and submits that in the application seeking condonation of delay, the petitioners have not disclosed specific reasons for not filing the written statement within the stipulated time.;