' Respondent filed a suit for recovery against the petitioner, which was ex parte decreed. Petitioner moved an application for setting aside the said decree, which was allowed by the trial Court. On 15-1-2002, the learned Civil Judge adjourned the case to 29-1-2002 for filing of written statement by the petitioner. On this date, the written statement was not filed and adjournment was sought, upon which the case was adjourned to 18-2-2002. Again on 18-2-2002, a similar request was made and the case was postponed to 19-3-2002, when the petitioner could not file the written statement.
Resultantly, his defence was struck off.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that sufficient opportunity was not given to the petitioner for filing the written statement; besides the Court had not passed any speaking order under the provisions of Order VIII, rule 1, C.P.C. For filing of the written statement, therefore, the provisions of Order VIII, rule 10, C.P.C. Could not be applied.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and find that one more opportunity should have been given to the petitioner, however, there is some slackness on the part of the petitioner, in filing the written statement. In the interest of justice by imposition of costs, the respondent can be compensated. Resultantly, the impugned order is set aside. The petitioner is directed to file his written statement before the Court on the next date of hearing, subject to payment of Rs,1,000 as costs. In case of non-payment of costs, this petition would be deemed to have been dismissed.