Case Law Details
Zerita Ashlen Rocha Vs Ann Mary Varghese (Kerala High Court)
It is undisputed that the petitioners had filed their written statement; but there was some formal defect in the same. The Court below even after noticing that the written statement was filed, rejected I.A.No.3123/2018 holding that no written statement was filed. Consequentially, Ext.P3 order was passed, confirming the ex-parte order.
On an appreciation of the pleadings and materials on record, I find that the course adopted by the Court below to be hyper technical and unwarranted especially when the petitioners had filed the written statement within the prescribed time period permitted by the Court below. The Court below ought to have granted the petitioners an opportunity to cure defect in the written statement, instead of taking the drastic step of rejecting the application. It is trite, Courts should make every endevour to dispose of a case on merits rather than on default.
HC permits petitioners to cure the defects in the written statement within two weeks and present the written statement before the court below.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
