Supreme court imposed rs.1 lac cost

File attached was probably damaged hence,text file is being attached now

1 


IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION 


CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2982 OF 2012 
(Arising out of SLP(C) No.9203/2012) 


SURESH KUMAR KANTILAL PATEL Appellant(s) 
:VERSUS: 


BALKRISHNA LAXMIDAS KOTHARI Respondent(s) 


ORDER 


1. Leave granted. 
2. The Trial Court passed an ex-parte decree 
evicting the appellant-tenant. On appeal filed by 
the appellant-tenant, the Appellate Court set aside 
the ex-parte decree and remanded the matter back to 
the Trial Court for fresh consideration. The 
respondent-landlord filed a writ petition before 
the High Court challenging the order passed by the 
Appellate Court by which the ex-parte decree passed 
by the Trial Court was set aside the matter was 
remanded for fresh consideration. 

2 


3. The High Court vide its order dated 17.1.2012 
upheld the order passed by the Appellate Court and 
directed the parties to appear before the Trial 
Court on 21.2.2012 and also directed that written 
statement shall be filed by the appellant-tenant on 
21.2.2012. 
4. The appellant-tenant failed to file written 
statement by the specified date and the Trial Court 
ordered the suit to proceed without the written 
statement of the appellant-tenant. The appellant-
tenant filed an application for extension of time 
before the High Court for filing written statement 
which was dismissed. The appellant has thus 
approached this Court. 
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the 
parties and perused the impugned judgment passed by 
the High Court as also the judgments passed by the 
Courts below. 
6. Learned counsel for the appellant-tenant 
submits that the written statement were ready for 
filing on 24.2.2012. In the peculiar facts and 

3 


circumstances of this case, we are of the considered 
view that ends of justice would meet if the delay in 
filing the written statement is condoned subject to 
payment of costs of Rs.1 lakh by the appellant 
within four weeks from today. We direct accordingly. 


7. This appeal is disposed of with the 
aforementioned observations and directions. 
.....................J 
(DALVEER BHANDARI) 


.....................J 
(DIPAK MISRA) 


New Delhi; 
March 21, 2012. 




A good citation but the problem is earlier time was allowed but for extended time the defendant did not file the ws so this fine.

THE FINE IS NOT FOR FIRST DELAY, THE SAME WAS CONDONED.