Allowed

Nachhattar Kaur v. Baldev Singh & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Feb 2012CR/656/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a revision petition filed under Article 227 challenging an order striking off a written statement. The court directed the trial court to grant the petitioner another opportunity to file the written statement upon payment of a cost precedent, allowing the suit to proceed.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition allowed; trial court directed to grant another opportunity to file written statement on payment of Rs.10,000 cost precedent.

Nachhattar Kaur Vs Baldev Singh & Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

C. R. No. 656 of 2012

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Case No. : C. R. No. 656 of 2012

¶5

Date of Decision : February 01, 2012

¶6

Nachhatar Kaur

¶7

.... Petitioner Vs.

¶8

Baldev Singh and others .... Respondents

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL

¶10

¶11

Present : Mr. P. K. Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

¶13

L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) :

¶14

Defendant no.1 Nachhatar Kaur has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing order dated 16.01.2012 (Annexure P-1), passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kharar thereby striking off the defence of defendant no.1-petitioner for not filing written statement.

¶15

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file.

¶16

Perusal of the impugned order reveals that defendant no.1petitioner put in appearance through counsel in the trial court on 26.08.2011

¶17

C. R. No. 656 of 2012

¶18

¶19

and since the written statement was not filed till 16.01.2012 – the date of impugned order, in spite of expiry of the maximum period of 90 days prescribed by Order 8 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, defence of defendant no.1-petitioner was struck off by the trial court.

¶20

Counsel for the petitioner contended that written statement of defendant no.1 was ready on 07.11.2011 i.e. on date of hearing prior to date of impugned order, but inadvertently, the same was not filed in the Court and it was wrongly noted on the brief that the written statement had been filed. Counsel for the petitioner pointed out that he has attached his own affidavit (Annexure P-2) in this regard.

¶21

Keeping in view the aforesaid, I am of the considered opinion that ends of justice would be met if another opportunity is granted to defendant no.1-petitioner to file written statement, subject to payment of cost. It may be added that no further proceedings have taken place in the trial court as the suit was adjourned on 16.01.2012 to 23.02.2012 for filing of replication by plaintiffs to written statement of defendant no.2.

¶22

I intend to dispose of this revision petition without issuing notice to respondents no.1 to 4/plaintiffs so as to avoid further delay in disposal of the suit and also to save the respondents no.1 to 4/plaintiffs of the expenses they may have to incur in engaging counsel for the purpose of this revision petition, if notice thereof is issued to them.

¶23

In view of the aforesaid, the instant revision petition is allowed

¶24

C. R. No. 656 of 2012

¶25

¶26

and trial court is directed to grant another opportunity to defendant no.1 to file written statement, subject to payment of Rs.10,000/- as cost precedent.

¶27

Defendant no.1 shall file the written statement on or before

¶28

23.02.2012 in the trial court.

¶29

February 01, 2012

¶30

monika

¶31

( L. N. MITTAL ) JUDGE

Nachhattar Kaur v. Baldev Singh & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nachhattar Kaur v. Baldev 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

Harbans Singh Batra Vs Gurpreet Singh and Anr.

Sonia Vs Vinod Kumar

Ram Chander Vs Ramanand and Anr.

Ashik Ali Vs State Bank of India

Prem Devi and Anr. Vs Rohtash and Anr.

Sarwan Singh Vs Roshan Lal