If Trial Court passes no order on a 'specific prayer', same is beyond scope and ambit of High Court: Supreme Court

Read Time: 06 minutes

Noting that there was no order passed by the Trial Court on a specific prayer made by the parties, the Top Court on Tuesday held that the same was not the subject matter before the High Court, therefore, any further observations made by the High Court would be said to be beyond the scope and ambit of the petition filed before it.

In the case before the Supreme Court, there was no order passed by the Trial Court on the specific prayer made by the defendants to allow them to file written statement and the trial Court had just allowed condonation of delay and had set aside an ex-parte decree. 

A bench of Justice MR Shah and Justice BV Nagarathna opined that only such order was the subject matter before the High Court and the further observations made by it that defendants could not be permitted to file their written statement, was beyond its scope.

Sudhir Ranjan Patra (Dead) thr. his legal representatives has approached the Supreme Court in appeal challenging the Orissa High Court's order denying their prayer to file written statements.

In a suit instituted for declaration of right, title, interest and possession over the suit schedule land, and permanent injunction against the defendant-appellants, the appellants had filed a petition for time to file their written statement. However, in spite of several adjournments, they did not file written statement.

Later, the trial court passed an ex-parte order. The appellants filed application under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC to set aside the ex­ parte decree along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay in filing the CMA. They also prayed to allow the filing of written statement and to take up the suit on merits.

Trial Court allowed CMA seeking condonation of delay only.

The plaintiff approached the High Court against such order. High Court confirmed the said order and further passed an order that on setting aside of the ex-­parte decree and consequently the suit being restored to file,  defendant-appellants could not be permitted to file their written statement and that they can only take part in the hearing of the suit without propounding their own case.

Top Court opined that once the ex­-parte decree was set aside the defendant could not be relegated back to the position prior to the date of hearing of the suit and it should have been left to the Trial Court to consider the prayer of allowing the defendants to file written statement or not, which was also prayed in the CMA.

Accordingly, the said question was remanded to the Trial Court. 

"The learned Trial Court to consider the issue/question with respect to the prayer of defendant Nos. 2 and 3 to allow them to file their written statement within a period of three months from the first date of hearing of the suit, which shall be within a period of one month from today. The present appeals are allowed to the aforesaid extent....", ordered the division bench.

Case title: Sudhir Ranjan Patra (Dead) thr. LRs. & Anr. vs. Himansu Sekhar Srichandan & Ors.