Allowed

Shara Ram Alias Shara and Anr. v. Sat Pal

Punjab & Haryana HC22 Sept 2010CR/6123/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a revision petition challenging an order striking off the petitioners defence for non-filing of a written statement. The order was set aside on condition precedent of payment of costs to enable filing of the written statement.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; petitioners granted opportunity to file written statement subject to payment of costs of Rs. 3000/-.

Shara Ram Alias Shara and Anr. Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

Civil Revision No. 6123 of 2010

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Civil Revision No. 6123 of 2010 (O&M)

¶5

Date of Decision: 22.9.2010.

¶6

Shara Ram alias Shara and another

....Petitioners

Versus

Satpal

...Respondent

CORAM : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg

¶12

Present:Mr. Naveen Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶13

RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J

¶14

This is defendants' revision petition challenging the impugned order whereby defence of the petitioners has been struck off for non-filing of written statement within the prescribed period of 90 days.

¶15

Challenging the aforesaid order learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that the provisions of Order 8 Rule 1 CPC are directory in nature and moreover no prejudice is going to be caused to the respondents in case the petitioners are allowed to file their written statement.

¶16

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶17

The provision of Order 8 Rule 1 CPC has been held to be directory

¶18

by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Salem Advocate Bar Association, Tamil Nadu Vs. Union of India, 2005 (3) Civil Court Cases 420.

¶19

It is also well settled that the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure are hand maid for administration of justice and they are to be construed liberally. The suit is at the preliminary stage and no prejudice is going to be caused to the respondents. More over the respondents can very well be compensated with suitable costs.

¶20

In this view of the matter, the impugned order dated 16.7.2010 is set aside. The petitioners are granted one more opportunity to file written statement subject to payment of costs which are assessed at Rs. 3000/-. The payment of costs shall be a condition precedent for allowing them to file their

¶21

¶22

Civil Revision No. 6123 of 2010

¶23

written statement. Let the petitioners appears before trial Court on the date fixed i.e. 27.9.2010. On their appearance the petitioners shall tender the costs as assessed to the plaintiff/respondent and on their doing so, the trial Court shall allow them to file written statement. However, it is made clear that no further opportunity shall be granted to the petitioners and in case of their failure to make the payment of costs and file their written statement on the date fixed, the present revision petition shall be deemed to be dismissed.

¶24

(RAKESH KUMAR GARG) JUDGE

¶25

22.9.2010. Reema

Shara Ram Alias Shara and Anr. v. Sat Pal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shara Ram Alias Shara and Anr. v. Sat Pal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Balraj S/O Jai Pal S/O Dal Chand Vs Harinder S/O Govind Ram

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs M/S Jagdamba Foods Ltd.

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs M/S Jagdamba Food Ltd.

Ashrafi & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Gurnam Singh and Ors. Vs Gurbachan Singh and Anr.

Mohan Lal Vs Lakhan Singh