Man Singh and Another Man Singh and Another v. and Another Rekha and Another
Case Details
(O&M) CR-5998-2025 (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-5998-2025 (O&M) CR Decided on :- 01.09.2025 Decided on : Man Singh and Another Man Singh and Another ....Petitioners VERSUS and Another Rekha and Another ....Respondents
Legal Reasoning
merits, 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 merits, 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 to and is in aid of justice. procedural law is always subservient to and is in aid of justice. procedural law is always subservient 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 order dated 11.04.2025 passed by the learned trial Court is set aside and one 11.04.2025 passed by the learned trial Court is set aside and one passed by the learned trial Court is set aside and one 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 TRIPTI SAINI 2025.09.03 12:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CR-5998-2025 (O&M) -3- - subject to statement on or before the date fixed before the learned trial Court subject to statement on or before the date fixed before the learned trial Court statement on or before the date fixed before the learned trial Court payment of Rs.8 8,000/- as costs to be paid to the plaintiff . It is made e paid to the plaintiffs-respondents. 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 er without this order having any bearing on trial. Court would proceed with the matter without this order having any bearing on trial. er without this order having any bearing on trial. Court would proceed with the matt 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 M Mr. G.C.Shahpuri, Advocate for the petitioners. Present: Mr. G.C.Shahpuri, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. G.C.Shahpuri, Advocate for the petitioners. MANDEEP PANNU J. MANDEEP PANNU -.- 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 11.04.2025 learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hodal, 11.04.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hodal, learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hodal, District Palwal, whereby the defence of the defendant District Palwal, was struck off whereby the defence of the defendants-petitioners was struck off and they have been precluded from filing the written statement. and they have been precluded from filing the written statement. and they have been precluded from filing the written statement. 2. Learned counsel for the defendants Learned counsel for the defendant s-petitioners would contend that the plaintiffs preferred a suit for declaration and permanent injunction respondents-plaintiffs preferred a suit for declaration and permanent injunction plaintiffs preferred a suit for declaration and permanent injunction plaintiffs preferred a suit for declaration and permanent injunction regarding the agricultural land mentioned in the plaint. In the said suit, upon notice regarding the agricultural land mentioned in the plaint. In the said suit, upon notice regarding the agricultural land mentioned in the plaint. In the said suit, upon notice regarding the agricultural land mentioned in the plaint. In the said suit, upon notice on 17.01.2025, the defendants-petitioners have filed on 17.01.2025, the defendants power of attorney and the petitioners have filed power of attorney and the matter was adjourned to 18.01.2025, on which date they sought time to file written matter was adjourned to 18.01.2025, on which date they sought time to file written matter was adjourned to 18.01.2025, on which date they sought time to file written matter was adjourned to 18.01.2025, on which date they sought time to file written statement. The matter was adjourned to 24.02.2025 for filing of written statement. statement. The matter was adjourned to 24.02.2025 for filing of written statement. statement. The matter was adjourned to 24.02.2025 for filing of written statement. statement. The matter was adjourned to 24.02.2025 for filing of written statement. r was taken up on However, as the Presiding Officer was to go on leave, the matter was taken up on However, as the Presiding Officer was to go on leave, the matte However, as the Presiding Officer was to go on leave, the matte 21.02.2025, instead of 24.02.2025 and the matter was adjourned to 21.03.2025. 21.02.2025, instead of 24.02.2025 and the matter was adjourned to 21.03.2025 21.02.2025, instead of 24.02.2025 and the matter was adjourned to 21.03.2025 21.02.2025, instead of 24.02.2025 and the matter was adjourned to 21.03.2025 Learned counsel fairly conceded that despite the numerous opportunities, the Learned counsel fairly conceded that despite the numerous opportunities, the Learned counsel fairly conceded that despite the numerous opportunities, the Learned counsel fairly conceded that despite the numerous opportunities, the petitioners have failed to file the written statement, but they never had petitioners have failed to file the written statement, but they never ha petitioners have failed to file the written statement, but they never ha defendants-petitioners have failed to file the written statement, but they never ha any intention not to file the written statement. He further submits that if the any intention not to file the written statement. He further submits that if the any intention not to file the written statement. He further submits that if the any intention not to file the written statement. He further submits that if the TRIPTI SAINI 2025.09.03 12:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CR-5998-2025 (O&M) -2- - defendants-petitioners be petitioners be given one opportunity, would file the written given one opportunity, they would file the written statement and they are they are willing to compensate the plaintiff respondent by ways of willing to compensate the plaintiff-respondent by ways of costs. 3. ve heard learned counsel for the petitioners and gone through the I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and gone through the ve heard learned counsel for the petitioners and gone through the I ha 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 struck-off on the ground that off on the ground that the written statement was not filed and the cost was the written statement was not filed and the cost was not paid. 5. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Desh Raj vs. Balkishan (D) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of 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 he 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 he unamended provision of Order VIII Rule 1 CPC continues to be dispute matter, t 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 to 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 to 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 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, would 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 would 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 the date to be fixed before the learned trial for filing their written statement on the date to be fixed before the learned trial the date to be fixed before the learned trial for filing their written statement 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 Court. No prejudice would be caused to the other side in case the suit is decided on
Decision
Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 2025 September 01, 2025 tripti (MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking speaking : Speaking Whether speaking/non : Yes/No : Yes/No Whether reportable Whether reportable TRIPTI SAINI 2025.09.03 12:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document