• Today: November 01, 2025

Rani Kusum v. Kanchan Devi (AIR 2005 SC 2304)

01 November, 2025
1851
Rani Kusum v. Kanchan Devi (AIR 2005 SC 2304) — Easy Explainer | Order 8 Rule 1 CPC: Mandatory or Directory?

Rani Kusum v. Kanchan Devi (AIR 2005 SC 2304)

Supreme Court of India 2005 AIR 2005 SC 2304 CPC • Written Statement 6 min read

By Gulzar Hashmi India • Published: 22 Oct 2025

Order 8 Rule 1 CPC Directory vs Mandatory Order 8 Rule 10 Procedural Justice
Hero image for Rani Kusum v. Kanchan Devi case explainer

Quick Summary

The question was simple: Is the 30–90 days limit in Order 8 Rule 1 CPC hard and fatal, or can courts allow a late written statement?

  • Answer: The limit is directory, not mandatory.
  • Why: Procedure should help justice, not block it. No penal consequence is stated for delay.
  • But: Extensions are not routine—only for exceptional reasons.

Issues

  1. Is the O8R1 time limit for a written statement mandatory or directory?

Rules

  • Procedural law’s aim: to advance justice; avoid rigid readings unless statute says so.
  • No penalty in O8R1: absence of a strict consequence → provision is directory.
  • Court’s discretion: Late WS may be accepted in exceptional circumstances, with reasons.
  • Order 8 Rule 10: Provides flexible responses to non-filing, supporting a directory view.
Exam Tip: Ask: “Is there a penal bar?” If not, lean directory—subject to restraint.

Facts — Timeline

View Image
10 Nov 2003: Summons served on respondent; WS due in 30 days (extendable to 90).
10 Feb 2004: 90-day limit ends; no written statement filed.
10 Jul 2004: Written statement filed very late; plaintiff objects.
Trial Court: Accepts WS; says procedure should not defeat justice.
High Court (Patna): Affirms; O8R1 is directory.
Supreme Court (2005): Dismisses appeal; holds O8R1 is directory; discretion is narrow and reason-based.

Arguments — Appellant vs Respondent

Appellant (Rani Kusum)

  • Post-amendment O8R1 is strict; no WS after 90 days.
  • Accepting late WS rewards delay and derails timelines.

Respondent (Kanchan Devi & Ors.)

  • Procedure should not kill defence; no penal bar is stated.
  • Court’s discretion survives; justice needs flexibility.
  • O8R1 is directory: It speeds up trials but does not bar defence absolutely.
  • Discretion remains: Late WS may be allowed in exceptional cases with recorded reasons.
  • O8R10 supports flexibility: Shows the Code’s design to permit suitable orders, not automatic decrees.
  • But caution: No routine extensions; parties must show why delay was beyond control.
Result: Appeal dismissed; High Court and Trial Court orders upheld.

Ratio Decidendi

Procedure serves justice. In the absence of a penal bar, time limits for filing a WS are directory, subject to cautious judicial discretion.

Why It Matters

  • Gives courts controlled flexibility to prevent miscarriage of justice.
  • Guides trial courts on recording reasons for delay condonation.
  • Exam-stable answer on O8R1 vs O8R10 balance.

Key Takeaways

  • 1 O8R1 is directory; justice first.
  • 2 No routine condonation—exceptional reasons only.
  • 3 Record reasons; use O8R10 thoughtfully.
  • 4 Procedure cannot defeat substantive rights.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: “TIME HELPS, NOT HURTS.”

  • TIME → O8R1 sets timelines.
  • HELPS → goal is speed, not penalty.
  • NOT HURTS → courts may allow late WS in rare cases.

3-Step Hook:

  1. Check purpose: Is the rule procedural?
  2. Find penalty: Is a bar stated? (No → directory.)
  3. Apply discretion: Are reasons exceptional and recorded?

IRAC Outline

Issue

Is the 90-day cap in O8R1 CPC mandatory?

Rule

Procedural rules advance justice; no penalty → directory; O8R10 shows flexibility.

Application

Late WS allowed due to directory reading; court retains narrow discretion with reasons.

Conclusion

Directory, not mandatory; appeal dismissed; WS rightly accepted.

Glossary

Order 8 Rule 1 CPC
Fixes time for filing a written statement.
Order 8 Rule 10 CPC
Lets the court act if WS is not filed.
Directory Provision
Guides conduct; non-compliance is not always fatal.
Mandatory Provision
Must be obeyed strictly; breach leads to invalidity or penalty.

Student FAQs

No. Only exceptional, justified delays with reasons recorded by the court.

Not at all. Parties must try to meet timelines; discretion is narrow, not automatic.

It can act under O8R10, but must still apply its mind and pass a reasoned order.
Reviewed by The Law Easy
Civil Procedure Written Statement Case Law

Comment

Nothing for now