Allowed

Ram Kishan v. Man Singh & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Jan 2012CR/1761/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, exercising powers under Article 227 of the Constitution, set aside a trial court order that allowed deletion of additional paras in a plaintiff's replication to defendant's written statements regarding an amended plaint. The Court held that plaintiffs have a right to reply to amended written statements irrespective of their failure to file a replication to the original ones.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order allowing deletion of additional paras in the replication is set aside; plaintiffs are permitted to file the replication.

Ram Kishan Vs Man Singh & Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Revision No. 1761 of 2011 Date of decision : January 06, 2012

Ram Kishan

....Petitioner

versus

Man Singh and others

....Respondents

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal

¶9

Present : Mr. Mani Ram Verma, Advocate, for the petitioner

¶10

Mr. Parveen Hans, Advocate, for respondent no. 12

¶11

L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral)

¶12

Plaintiff no. 1 has filed the instant revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing order dated 23.11.2010 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hansi, thereby allowing application moved by defendant no. 5/respondent no. 12 Fateh Singh for deletion of additional paras in the replication filed by the plaintiffs.

¶13

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

¶14

case file.

¶15

Plaintiffs did not file any replication to written statement which was filed to the original plaint. However, plaint was amended. Defendants filed fresh written statements to the amended plaint. On application of plaintiffs, defendants were directed to delete new pleas from their written statements to the amended plaint. However, the said order of the trial court has been set aside by this Court vide order of even date passed in CR No.

¶16

Civil Revision No. 1761 of 2011

¶17

-2-

¶18

7177 of 2010. The plaintiffs filed replication to the written statements. Defendant no. 5 moved application for deleting additional paras from the replication. The said application has been allowed by learned trial court vide impugned order Annexure P/1, which is under challenge in this revision petition.

¶19

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

¶20

case file.

¶21

The plaintiffs have right to file replication to the written statements filed by defendants in response to amended plaint. The said right cannot be curtailed merely because the plaintiffs had not filed replication to the written statements to the original plaint. The impugned order is patently illegal and perverse and suffers from jurisdictional error. Accordingly, the instant revision petition is allowed. Impugned order Annexure P/1 passed by learned trial court is set aside. Plaintiffs are permitted to file replication to the written statements filed by the defendants in response to the amended plaint.

¶22

( L.N. Mittal )

¶23

January 06, 2012 Judge 'dalbir'

Ram Kishan v. Man Singh & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Kishan v. Man Singh & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surjit Singh Vs Balwinder Kaur and Ors.

Ravneet Bhatwa Vs Mala Bhatwa

Sumit Verma Vs Raj Paul Gulati & Anr.

Raj Kumar Vs Mohinder Singh

Manoj Kumar & Anr. Vs Anil

Jastej Singh Chhina Vs Balwant Singh Sandhu & Ors.