Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a tenancy case where the appellants, legal representatives of the deceased Abdul Razak, challenged the Bombay High Court's order that struck off their additional written statement. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 filed a suit for tenancy rights and possession against the defendants, including Abdul Razak, who had denied their claims. After Razak's death, the appellants were impleaded, and they filed an additional written statement asserting ownership based on inventory proceedings. The trial court allowed this statement, but the High Court later struck it off, leading to the appeal. The Supreme Court examined the delay in the application to strike off the statement, the applicability of Order VI Rule 16 of the CPC, and the jurisdictional errors of the High Court. The Court found that the High Court did not properly assess the trial court's reasoning and failed to recognize that the additional written statement was filed without objection and was relevant to the case. The Supreme Court restored the trial court's order, emphasizing the need for careful consideration of pleadings and the rights of legal representatives. The appellants were awarded costs for the unnecessary litigation caused by the High Court's decision.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Striking off Pleadings - Court's Power - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order VI Rule 16 - The court's power to strike off pleadings must be exercised with caution and only when pleadings are unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous, or tend to prejudice the fair trial. The High Court failed to consider the trial court's findings and the absence of a case for striking off the additional written statement. Held that the trial court's order was justified (Paras 12-27).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court was justified in striking off the additional written statement filed by the legal representatives of the deceased defendant.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, restored the trial court's order, and imposed costs of Rs. 25,000 on respondent Nos. 1 and 2 for unnecessary litigation.
Law Points
- Pleadings
- Striking off pleadings
- Legal representatives
- Jurisdiction
- Delay in applications
