# rule 1 as also the object and purpose behind enacting same in the present form, the

- **Citation:** C. L. NO.34/
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1953-09-02
- **Case number:** C. L. NO.34/
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/rule-1-as-also-the-object-and-purpose-behind-enacting-same-in-the-present-form-163075
- **Pages:** 2

## Text

129

Upon a careful consideration of the scope of power of the court regarding
extension of time for filling the Written statement in view of the provisions of Order VII
rule 1 as also the object and purpose behind enacting same in the present form, the
Hon`ble Court (Hon`ble Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar) has observed and held that the
provision has to be construed as directory and not mandatory. Ordinarily, the time
schedule prescribed by Order VII rule I has to be honoured but in exceptional situations
occasioned by reasons beyond the control of the defendant, the court may extend time for
filling the written statement though the period of 30 days or 90 days, referred to in the
provisions, has expired .The extension can be only by way of an exception and for
reasons assigned by the defendant and also recorded in writing by the court to its
satisfaction.
 While enclosing herewith a copy of judgment and order dated 19.5.2005 in
CMWP No.25816 of 2005-Manasoor Ali versus Court of In-charge District
Judge/Additional District Judge, Court No.1 Kanpur Nagar & ors. I am directed to
request you to kindly circulate the copy of the judgment to all the judicial officers under
your administrative control for guidance and following the law laid down by the Hon`ble
Supreme Court and this Hon`ble Court.
C. L. NO.34/ 2007 : Admin 'G' Dated 29th August, 2007.
On the above subject I am directed to inform you that to bring improvement in the
administration of Civil Justice System in the Chief Justices Conference -2007, it has been
resolved that the time frame relating to filing of written statements under Order VIII Rule
1 of C.P.C. be adhered to and only in exceptional cases the courts should permit filing of
written statement beyond the upper time limit of 90 days.
I am, therefore to request you to kindly bring the contents of the Circular Letter to
the notice of all the Judicial Officers working under you for strict compliance of the
directions of the Hon'ble Court.
C. L. No.70/2007Admin(G) : Dated :13.12.2007.

The Hon'ble Court has noticed that the Presiding officers of Subordinate Court are
not adhering to the provisions as laid down in Order VIII Rule 1 and are liberally granting
opportunities to the defendants to file written statements even beyond the prescribed time
limit which is resulting in procrastination of the trials in civil cases. Viewing this with
extreme seriousness the Hon'ble Court has desired that the Subordinate Courts be
impressed to strictly abide by the provisions as laid down in the above quoted order VIII
Rule 1 of C.P.C.

Therefore, I am directed to request you to kindly instruct all the Judicial Officers
working under your administrative control to make strict compliance of the provisions as
given in Order VIII Rule 1 C.P.C.
3.
SUMMONSES AND PROCESSES
(i)
Procedure for issue
C.L. No. 29/Xc-5 dated 27th March, 1968
130
 Notices and summonses should be issued in the forms in Hindi in Devanagari
script as specified in the ―Civil Prakriya Samhita (Hindi version of the Civil Procedure
Code) for the facility of the litigant public.
G.L. No. 51/46/120/92 dated 13th December, 1939 modified by
G.L. No.14 of 1940
Summonses should be sent to the Nazarat without delay after they have been
received duly filled up from the party concerned.
C.L. No. 53 dated 10th May, 1968
Under Order V, Rule 5 of the C.P.C. summonses are to be issued for settlement of
issue or for final hearing as the case may be. It is, however, permissible to fix a date for
filing written statement also while issuing summonses for settlement of issues. To issue a
summons for filing written statement only is violative of the aforesaid rule.
C.L. No. 7/VIII h-28 dated 18th January,1954
 It is the duty of the Munsarim before issuing any notice or summons against the
Government or an officer of the Government in his official capacity, to scrutinize
carefully the rules and orders governing the issue of such summonses and notices and to
obtain the order of the court before actually issuing it.
On members of Parliament
G.L. No. 4/VIII-b-28 dated 12th September, 1953
Attention of all judicial officers and Magistrates in the State is invited to the
provisions of article 105(3) of the Constitution which provides the same privileges for
members of Parliament in India as are enjoyed by members of the British Parliament.
One of the privileges is that no service of summons can be affected upon the members
when they are within the precincts of the Parliament. It is not desirable that courts should
attempt to serve such summonses through the Presiding Officer or through the Parliament
secretariat. The appropriate procedure would be for the summons to be served direct upon
the member concerned outside the precincts of the Parliament, i.e., at their residence on at
some other place.
Same procedure should be followed for effecting service of summons upon
members of the State Legislatures who enjoy the same privilege under article 194(3) and
article 238 of the Constitution and section 19 (3) of the Government of part C States Act,
1951.
C.L. No. 16/VIII-b-28 dated 20th February, 1968
Procedure for service of summons on member of the State Legislature as
indicated in Court's G.L. No. 4/VIII-h-28, dated September 2, 1953, be strictly followed.
C.L. No. 32/VIIIb-28(G) dated 7th May, 1984
The procedure for service of summons on the member of the Parliament or the
State Legislature, as indicated in the aforesaid Court's G.L. and also in the provisions of