Satish Kumar and Others Satish Kumar and Others v. Krishan Lal and Others Krishan Lal and Others
Case Details
CR-6265-2025 (O&M) (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-6265-2025 (O&M) CR Decided on :- 09.09.2025 Decided on : Satish Kumar and Others Satish Kumar and Others ....Petitioners VERSUS Krishan Lal and Others Krishan Lal and Others ....Respondents
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. in view of law laid down above and keeping in view the Resultantly, in view of law laid down above and keeping in view the in view of law laid down above and keeping in view the Resultantly, contention of learned counsel for the petitioners, contention of learned counsel for t the present revision petition is he petitioners, the present revision petition is allowed in the interest of justice in the interest of justice. The impugned order dated passed by . The impugned order dated 07.05.2025 passed by the learned trial Court is set aside and one effective opportunity is granted to the the learned trial Court is set aside and one effective opportunity is granted to the the learned trial Court is set aside and one effective opportunity is granted to the the learned trial Court is set aside and one effective opportunity is granted to the TRIPTI SAINI 2025.09.11 10:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-6265-2025 (O&M) (O&M) -3- - petitioners/defendants No.1 to 3 their written statement on or before the date /defendants No.1 to 3 to file their written statement on or before the date their written statement on or before the date fixed before the learned trial Court subject to payment of Rs. fixed before the learned trial Court as costs to be subject to payment of Rs.25,000/- as costs to be paid jointly by the petitioners jointly by the petitioners to respondent No.1 before the learned trial No.1 – plaintiff before the learned trial Court. It is made clear that faili ng to file the written statement in terms of this . It is made clear that failing to file the written statement in terms of this ng to file the written statement in terms of this order, the petitioners would not be entitled to any further opportunity for the said order, the petitioners would not be entitled to any further opportunity for the said order, the petitioners would not be entitled to any further opportunity for the said order, the petitioners would not be entitled to any further opportunity for the said purpose and the trial Court would proceed with the matter without this order purpose and the trial Court would proceed with the matter without this order purpose and the trial Court would proceed with the matter without this order purpose and the trial Court would proceed with the matter without this order having any bearing on trial. having any bearing on trial. 8. 9. in the aforesaid terms. The revision petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. The revi
Arguments
MANDEEP PANNU CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU CORAM : HON'BLE M Mr. Nikhil Saini, Advocate for the petitioners. Present: Mr. Nikhil Saini, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Nikhil Saini, 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 07.05.2025 07.05.2025 passed by the learned Senior learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sonepat Sonepat, whereby the defence of the petitioner /defendant Nos.1 to 3 whereby the defence of the petitioners/defendant Nos.1 to 3 was struck off and they have b een precluded from filing the written statement. and they have been precluded from filing the written statement. 2. would Learned counsel for the petitioners/defendant Nos. 1 to 3 would Learned counsel for the petitioner Learned counsel for the petitioner contend that the respondent No.1 the respondent No.1-plaintiff preferred a suit for permanent injunction plaintiff preferred a suit for permanent injunction n the said suit, upon notice on under Section 38 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. In the said suit, upon notice on under Section 38 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. under Section 38 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. 29.05.2023, petitioners /defendants No.1 to 3 had put in appearance on 12.07.2023. , petitioners/defendants No.1 to 3 had put in appearance on 12.07.2023. /defendants No.1 to 3 had put in appearance on 12.07.2023. Learned counsel would further contend that from the very first date of issuing Learned counsel would further contend that from the very first date of issuing Learned counsel would further contend that from the very first date of issuing Learned counsel would further contend that from the very first date of issuing ed trial Court, the notice to the defendants to the date now fixed before the learned trial Court, the notice to the defendants to the date now fixed before the learn notice to the defendants to the date now fixed before the learn case is pending for service of defendant No.19 as the plaintiff is not supplying his case is pending for service of defendant No.19 as the plaintiff is not supplying his case is pending for service of defendant No.19 as the plaintiff is not supplying his case is pending for service of defendant No.19 as the plaintiff is not supplying his fairly conceded that despite the numerous correct/complete address. However, he fairly conceded that despite the numerous fairly conceded that despite the numerous correct/complete address. However, he opportunities, the petitioners/defendants No.1 to 3 opportunities, the petitioners the written /defendants No.1 to 3 have failed to file the written statement, but they never had any intention not to file the written statement. He statement, but they never had any intention not to file the written statement. He statement, but they never had any intention not to file the written statement. He statement, but they never had any intention not to file the written statement. He further submits that if the petitioners/defendants No.1 to 3 further submits that if the petitioners given one /defendants No.1 to 3 be given one TRIPTI SAINI 2025.09.11 10:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-6265-2025 (O&M) (O&M) -2- - opportunity, they they would file the written statement and willing to would file the written statement and they are willing to compensate the respondent by ways of costs. the respondent No.1-plaintiff by ways of costs. 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 struck-off on the ground that off on the ground that the despite numerous opportunities written statement despite numerous opportunities written statement was not filed. 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) ad 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, d 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 d be adequately met if one opportunity is granted to the defendants/petitioners d 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 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 09, 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 2025.09.11 10:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document