Mandeep Singh and Another Mandeep Singh and Another v. Sukhchain Singh Sukhchain Singh
Case Details
(O&M) CR-5694-2025 (O&M) -1- - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH -.- CR CR-5694-2025 (O&M) Decided on :-25.08.2025 Decided on : Mandeep Singh and Another Mandeep Singh and Another ....Petitioners VERSUS Sukhchain Singh Sukhchain Singh ....Respondent
Legal Reasoning
, after affording due opportunity to contest the same. It is settled law that the merits, after affording due opportunity to contest the same. It is settled law that the , after affording due opportunity to contest the same. It is settled law that the , after affording due opportunity to contest the same. It is settled law that the procedural law is always subservient to and is in aid of justice. procedural law is always subservient to and is in aid of justice. procedural law is always subservient to and is in aid of justice. 7. Resultantly, the present revision petition is allowed. The impugned Resultantly, the present revision petition is allowed. The impugned Resultantly, the present revision petition is allowed. The impugned Resultantly, the present revision petition is allowed. The impugned he learned trial Court is set aside and one order dated 16.12.2024 passed by the learned trial Court is set aside and one he learned trial Court is set aside and one order dated 16.12.2024 passed by t effective opportunity is granted to the defendants/petitioners to file their written effective opportunity is granted to the defendants/petitioners to file their written effective opportunity is granted to the defendants/petitioners to file their written effective opportunity is granted to the defendants/petitioners to file their written statement on or before the date fixed before the learned trial Court statement on or before the date fixe subject to d before the learned trial Court subject to TRIPTI SAINI 2025.08.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CR-5694-2025 (O&M) -3- - payment of Rs.5 5,000/- as costs to be paid to th . It is made as costs to be paid to the plaintiff-respondent. It is made clear that failing to file the written statement in terms of this order, the petitioners clear that failing to file the written statement in terms of this order, the petitioners clear that failing to file the written statement in terms of this order, the petitioners clear that failing to file the written statement in terms of this order, the petitioners would not be entitled to any further opportunity for the said purpose and the trial would not be entitled to any further opportunity for the said purpose and the trial would not be entitled to any further opportunity for the said purpose and the trial would not be entitled to any further opportunity for the said purpose and the trial Court would proceed with the matter without this order having any bearing on trial. Court would proceed with the matter without thi Court would proceed with the matter without thi s order having any bearing on trial. 8. 9. The revision petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. The revision petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. The revision petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Arguments
MANDEEP PANNU CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE Present: Mr. Raminder Singh Dhaliwal Mr. Raminder Singh Dhaliwal, Advocate for the petitioner -.- , Advocate for the petitioners. MANDEEP PANNU J. MANDEEP PANNU J. 1. The present revision petition has been preferred against the impugned The present revision petition has been preferred against the impugned The present revision petition has been preferred against the impugned The present revision petition has been preferred against the impugned order dated 16.12.2024 passed by the Trial Court whereby the defence of the 16.12.2024 passed by the Trial Court whereby the defence of the passed by the Trial Court whereby the defence of the defendants-petitioner petitioners was struck off for the reason that the defendant petitioner was struck off for the reason that the defendant-petitioner statement even after the expiry of 90 days. failed to file the written statement even after the expiry of 90 days. failed to file the written 2. Learned counsel for the defendants Learned counsel for the defendant s-petitioners would contend that the plaintiff preferred a suit for declaration of his legal rights as per respondent-plaintiff preferred a suit for declaration of his legal rights as per plaintiff preferred a suit for declaration of his legal rights as per plaintiff preferred a suit for declaration of his legal rights as per petitioner No.1- conditions of affidavit dated 30.05.2022 executed by defendant-petitioner No.1 conditions of affidavit dated 30.05.2022 executed by defendant conditions of affidavit dated 30.05.2022 executed by defendant to use the agricultural land of the defendants- Mandeep Singh in his favour to use the agricultural land of the defendants to use the agricultural land of the defendants Mandeep Singh During the he time of harvest season for harvesting machinery. During the he time of harvest season for harvesting mach petitioners at the time of harvest season for harvesting mach the dispute was amicably settled and the matter was referred pendency of the suit, the dispute was amicably settled and the matter was referred the dispute was amicably settled and the matter was referred pendency of the suit, plaintiff undertook to the Mediation Centre. As per the settlement the respondent-plaintiff undertook to the Mediation Centre. As per the settlement the respondent to the Mediation Centre. As per the settlement the respondent iled by him, but the respondent backed out from the said to withdraw the civil suit filed by him, but the respondent backed out from the said iled by him, but the respondent backed out from the said to withdraw the civil suit f petitioners did not have the knowledge regarding the settlement. The defendants-petitioners did not have the knowledge regarding the petitioners did not have the knowledge regarding the settlement. The defendants same. Therefore, they could not file the written same. Therefore, they statement and accordingly the could not file the written statement and accordingly the defence of the defendants-petitioners was struck off. defence of the defendants It is further the contention s struck off. It is further the contention TRIPTI SAINI 2025.08.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CR-5694-2025 (O&M) -2- - that given one opportunity, he would file the written statement and he is willing to that given one opportunity, he would file the written statement and he is willing to that given one opportunity, he would file the written statement and he is willing to that given one opportunity, he would file the written statement and he is willing to respondent by ways of costs. compensate the plaintiff-respondent by ways of costs. compensate the plaintiff 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and gone through the I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and gone through the I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and gone through the I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and gone through the record of the case in hand. record of the case in hand. 4. The defence of the defendants/petitioner The defence of the defendant in the present case has been petitioners in the present case has been off on the ground that despite the period of 90 days having elapsed, the struck-off on the ground that despite the period of 90 days having elapsed, the off on the ground that despite the period of 90 days having elapsed, the off on the ground that despite the period of 90 days having elapsed, the written statement was not filed. written statement was not filed. 5. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Desh Raj vs. Balkishan (D) Desh Raj vs. Balkishan (D) had also examined through proposed LR Ms. Rohini [(2020) RCR (Civil) 807] had also examined through proposed LR Ms. Rohini [(2020) RCR (Civil) 807] through proposed LR Ms. Rohini [(2020) RCR (Civil) 807] commercial the timeline for filing of written statement and laid down that in a non-commercial the timeline for filing of written statement and laid down that in a non the timeline for filing of written statement and laid down that in a non dispute matter, the unamended provision of Order VIII Rule 1 CPC continues to be dispute matter, the unamended provision of Order VIII Rule 1 CPC continues to be dispute matter, the unamended provision of Order VIII Rule 1 CPC continues to be dispute matter, the unamended provision of Order VIII Rule 1 CPC continues to be directory and does not do away with the inherent discretion of the Courts to directory and does not do away with the inherent discretion of the Courts directory and does not do away with the inherent discretion of the Courts directory and does not do away with the inherent discretion of the Courts condone delay. 6. In view of above and in view of the settled law that the provision of In view of above and in view of the settled law that the provision of In view of above and in view of the settled law that the provision of In view of above and in view of the settled law that the provision of commercial suits, is only directory in Order VIII Rule 1 CPC, in the case of non-commercial suits, is only directory in commercial suits, is only directory in Order VIII Rule 1 CPC, in the case of non I am of the considered opinion that ends of justice nature and not mandatory, I am of the considered opinion that ends of justice I am of the considered opinion that ends of justice nature and not mandatory, ld be adequately met if one opportunity is granted to the defendants/petitioners would be adequately met if one opportunity is granted to the defendants/petitioners ld be adequately met if one opportunity is granted to the defendants/petitioners ld be adequately met if one opportunity is granted to the defendants/petitioners for filing their written statement on the date to be fixed before the learned trial for filing their written statement on the date to be fixed before the learned trial for filing their written statement on the date to be fixed before the learned trial for filing their written statement on the date to be fixed before the learned trial Court. No prejudice would be caused to the other side in case the suit is decided on Court. No prejudice would be caused to the other side in case the suit is decided on Court. No prejudice would be caused to the other side in case the suit is decided on Court. No prejudice would be caused to the other side in case the suit is decided on
Decision
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off. 2025 August 25, 2025 tripti (MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE speaking : Speaking Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether speaking/non : Yes/No : Yes/No Whether reportable Whether reportable TRIPTI SAINI 2025.08.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document