The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that advocates abstaining from work cannot, by itself, constitute an exceptional circumstance for extending the statutory 120-day deadline for filing a written statement. Justice Sanjay Dhar dismissed a petition challenging the rejection of an application seeking additional time.
Background
The dispute arose from a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction filed by Dali Rani before the Munsiff Court in Udhampur. Gulshan Kour was served with summons on August 29, 2019, and counsel entered appearance for both defendants the following day. However, their written statement was filed only on January 20, 2020, beyond the prescribed 120-day period.
Seeking permission for the delay, the defendants cited Gulshan Kour's age of around 70 years, her cataract surgery in November 2019, the death of a close relative requiring travel to Delhi, and the suspension of advocates' work for approximately one and a half months.
Justice Sanjay Dhar referred to the Division Bench ruling in Anoop Dutta v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and Others, decided on September 28, 2026. The Division Bench had clarified that courts could extend the deadline only in exceptionally difficult circumstances where filing within time became impossible for reasons beyond the defendant's control.
The Court observed:
"The statutory period of 120 days must be adhered to strictly and under normal circumstances and if the defendant violates the timeline provided under the amended Order V and Order VIII of CPC, right of the defendant shall stand forfeited."
Examining the medical documents, the Court found that the records established hospitalisation only from November 5 to November 6, 2019. No further medical evidence was produced to establish continued incapacity during the relevant period.
It also noted that Gulshan Kour had travelled to Delhi after her surgery, indicating that she could move from one place to another.
Rejecting the advocates' suspension of work as a justification, the Court held:
"So far as suspension of work by the advocates is concerned, the same does not form a ground for extending the time for filing written statement and in any case, the said ground cannot be categorised as an exceptionally hard circumstance that would make it impossible for a defendant to file written statement within the stipulated time."
Finding no exceptional circumstances warranting an extension, the High Court refused to interfere with the trial court's order and dismissed the petition along with the connected application.
