A court may restore a defaulting party’s right to file a written statement subject to costs and strict deadlines.

The petitioners invoked Article 227 of the Constitution to challenge the Tribunal’s order dated 25 February 2022, which had closed their right to file a written statement after they failed to do so despite sufficient opportunity.

The Tribunal had proceeded ex parte and the matter was listed for evidence.

The petitioners sought another opportunity to file their written statement, while the respondent opposed the request on the basis of the petitioners’ conduct before the Tribunal.

Whether the Tribunal’s order closing the petitioners’ right to file a written statement warranted interference under Article 227 of the Constitution.

Whether the petitioners should be granted a further opportunity to file a written statement, and, if so, on what conditions.

The Court considered its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution and referred to Order VIII Rule VI-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, observing that the applicable provision had been treated as directory in some Supreme Court judgments, though no such judgments were identified in the order.

The Court also relied on the interests of a fair trial and justice in deciding whether to grant a further opportunity, subject to conditions.

The Court found that the Tribunal had given the petitioners sufficient opportunity to file their written statement and that they had failed to use it; accordingly, the Tribunal had committed no material error in closing the right.

Nevertheless, to afford a fair opportunity in the pending proceedings, the Court set aside the impugned order and allowed the petitioners one further opportunity, conditioned on timely filing and payment of costs.

The petitioners were directed to file their written statement within 10 days and deposit ₹30,000 with the M.P. State Legal Services Authority, Indore, within seven days.

Failure to deposit the costs before filing would bar the Tribunal from permitting the written statement; the petitioners were also directed to file an appropriate application before the Tribunal to reopen their right, which the Tribunal must decide in accordance with law.

The Tribunal was asked to endeavour to decide the proceedings, pending since 2019, by 30 June 2027.