Shree Chandrashekhar, J. - (1.) The petitioner, who is the plaintiff in OS No.20 of 2016, is aggrieved of order dated 03.04.2017 by which the defendant no.1 has been permitted to file written statement after she was debarred from filing written statement vide order dated 28.02.2017.
(2.) What appears from the materials produced in the present proceeding is that the defendant no.1, who had appeared through her counsel on 20.08.2016, was debarred from filing written statement vide order dated 28.02.2017. The defendant no.1 has taken a stand that for want of some relevant documents she could not file her written statement of defence within the period prescribed under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC. On 03.04.2017 alongwith the written statement, she filed an application seeking condonation of delay of 131 days for filing the written statement. This application has been opposed by the plaintiff saying that it was immaterial.
(3.) The petitioner who seems to have raised a serious objection to the permission granted to the defendant no.1 for filing her written statement beyond the statutory period of thirty days, which may be extended but not beyond ninety days under proviso to Order VIII Rule 1 CPC, has not cared to remove the defects as pointed out by the registry in the last 17 months; the writ petition was filed on 11.05.2017.;