The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the petitioner's challenge to the trial court's order striking out his defence for non-filing of written statement. The court rejected the infirmity claim and upheld the lower court's discretion.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.R. No. 6862 of 2010 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 07.12.2010
Gurcharan Singh
.... Petitioner
Versus
Thakurdwara Nauharian Trust Society (Regd.) and others
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH
Present : Mr. Vineet Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner
ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL)
C.M. No. 30688-CII of 2010
For the reasons shown in the application, C.M. is allowed. Order dated 27.10.2010 is recalled and petition is restored to its original number.
C.R. No. 6862 of 2010
Present petition is filed challenging the order dated 16.7.2010 passed by Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Ambala whereby application moved by the petitioner to recall the order dated 8.8.2008 striking of the defence of the petitioner was rejected.
Undisputedly no written statement was filed within the statutory period as prescribed under Order 8 Rule 1 CPC and despite of service on the defendant-petitioner, petitioner remained absent and did not file any written statement and ultimately learned trial Court vide order dated 8.8.2008 directed to strike of the defence of the defendant.
C.R. No. 6862 of 2010 (O&M)
2
Undoubtedly provision of Order 8 Rule 1 CPC are not mandatory but are directory in nature and on sufficient cause being shown learned Court can permit the defendant to file written statement beyond statutory period.
In the present case defence of the defendant was directed to be struck of on 8.8.2008 because defendant did not file written statement despite of due service within the statutory period. Application for recalling the order dated 8.8.2008 was moved on 19.8.2009. The ground taken in the application is that defendant did not file written statement because he was assured by tenant in chief that tenant in chief would be contesting the suit on behalf of the subtenant–defendant (petitioner herein). Reason given by the defendant -petitioner seems to be afterthought and does not inspire confidence. In the opinion of this Court, trial Court was well within its jurisdiction while rejecting the application.
Dismissed.
(ALOK SINGH) JUDGE
07.12.2010 reena
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial court was within jurisdiction to reject the petitioner's application for recalling the order striking out the defence for failure to file a written statement within the statutory per
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Gurcharan Singh
Thakurdwara Nauharian Trust Society (Regd.)
Allok Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
