Written Statement
Introduction
A written statement ordinarily means a reply to the plaint filed by the plaintiff. It is the pleading
of the defendant. Order 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) contains provisions in
relation to written statement.
Written Statement
Rule 1 of Order 8 deals with written statement. It states that -
The Defendant shall, within thirty days from the date of service of summons on him, present a
written statement of his defence.
Provided that where the defendant fails to file the written statement within the said period of
thirty days, he shall be allowed to file the same on such other day, as may be specified by the
Court, for reasons to be recorded in writing, but which shall not be later than ninety days from
the date of service of summons.
Provided that where the defendant fails to file the written statement within the said period of
thirty days, he shall be allowed to file the written statement on such other day, as may be
specified by the Court, for reasons to be recorded in writing and on payment of such costs as the
Court deems fit, but which shall not be later than one hundred twenty days from the date of
service of summons and on expiry of one hundred twenty days from the date of service of
summons, the defendant shall forfeit the right to file the written statement and the Court shall not
allow the written statement to be taken on record.
New Facts to be Specially Pleaded in Written Statement
As per Rule 2 of Order 8 of CPC, the defendant must raise by his pleading all matters
which show the suit not be maintainable, or that the transaction is either void or voidable
in point of law, and all such grounds of defence as, if not raised, would be likely to take
the opposite party by surprise, or would raise issues of fact not arising out of the plaint,
as, for instance, fraud, limitation, release, payment, performance, or facts showing
illegality.
Denial to be Specific in Written Statement
As per Rule 3 of Order 8 of CPC, it shall not be sufficient for a defendant in his written
statement to deny generally the grounds alleged by the plaintiff, but the defendant must
deal specifically with each allegation of fact of which he does not admit the truth, except
damages.
Evasive Denial in Written Statement
As per Rule 4 of Order 8, where a defendant denies an allegation of fact in the plaint, he
must not do so evasively, but answer the point of substance. Thus, if it is alleged that he
received a certain sum of money, it shall not be sufficient to deny that he received that
particular amount, but he must deny that he received that sum or any part thereof, or else
set out how much he received. And if an allegation is made with diverse circumstances,
it shall not be sufficient to deny it along with those circumstances.
Set-Off to be Given in Written Statement
As per Rule 6 of Order 8 of CPC, where in a suit for the recovery of money the defendant
claims to set-off against the plaintiff's demand any ascertained sum of money legally
recoverable by him from the plaintiff, not exceeding the pecuniary limits of the
jurisdiction of the Court, and both parties fill the same character as they fill in the
plaintiff's suit, the defendant may, at the first hearing of the suit, but not afterwards unless
permitted by the Court, presents a written statement containing the particulars of the debt
sought to be set-off.
Counter Claim to be Stated in Written Statement
As per Rule 6B of Order 8 of CPC, where any defendant seeks to rely upon any ground
as supporting a right of counterclaim, he shall, in his written statement, state specifically
that he does so by way of counterclaim.
Failure to Present Written Statement
As per Rule 10 of Order 8 of CPC where any party from whom a written statement is
required under Rule 1 or Rule 9 fails to present the same within the time permitted or
fixed by the Court, as the case may be, the Court shall pronounce judgment against him,
or make such order in relation to the suit as it thinks fit and on the pronouncement of such
judgment a decree shall be drawn up.
Provided further that no Court shall make an order to extend the time provided under
Rule 1 of this Order for filing of the written statement.
Case Law
In Kailash v. Nankhu (2005), the Supreme Court held that the proviso to Rule 1 of
Order 8 of CPC is directory and permissive and not mandatory and imperative.
In Salem Advocate Bar Assn. V. Union of India (2005), the Supreme Court clarified
that under Rule 10 of CPC, the court has wide powers to ‘make such order in relation
to the suit as it thinks fit.’ The order extending the time to file a written statement
cannot be made routinely. The time can be extended only in exceptionally hard cases.