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.