Disposed¶24

Mukesh Kumar v. Vijay and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC4 May 2026CR/3722/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mukesh Kumar v. Vijay and another, CR-3722-2026, Punjab & Haryana High Court — Article 227 revision petition for expedition; Order VI Rule 17 CPC read with Section 151 CPC written-statement amendment application undecided over six months; Civil Suit No.406 of 2022 pending since 2022; disposed of with direction to trial court to expedite application and suit.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Panchkula, to decide the application under Order VI Rules 17 read with Section 151 CPC and the civil suit as expeditiously as possible; Registry directed to send a copy of the order forthwith for strict compliance. ¶24

Mukesh Kumar Vs Vijay and Anr. — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether a direction should be issued to the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Panchkula, to decide expeditiously the respondents' pending application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC read with Section 151 CPC for amendment of the written statement. +1 more

¶21

Court's answer

The learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Panchkula, had been proceeding at a snail's pace and had not decided the Order VI Rule 17/Section 151 CPC amendment application for more than six months.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

The revision petition was disposed of with a direction to the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Panchkula, to decide the application under Order VI Rules 17 read with Section 151 CPC as expeditiously as possible.

¶28

Key takeaways

Along with the amendment application, the civil suit was also to be concluded as expeditiously as possible.ratio¶28
Considering the limited nature of the relief sought, issuance of notice to the respondents was dispensed with, as it would only result in further delay.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Revision petition under Article 227 by plaintiff Mukesh Kumar (CR-3722-2026, High Court of Punjab & Haryana) seeking expedition of Civil Suit No.406 of 2022 and of the respondents' application dated 26.05.2025 under Order VI Rule 17 CPC read with Section 151 CPC for amendment of the written statement, which remained undecided for more than six months despite numerous adjournments. Considering the limited nature of relief, notice to the respondents was dispensed with; the Court, without commenting on the merits, observed that the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Panchkula, had been proceeding at a snail's pace, and disposed of the petition with a direction to decide the amendment application and the civil suit as expeditiously as possible. Registry directed to send a copy of the order forthwith to the trial court for strict compliance.

¶1

CR-3722-2026

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

120

¶5

CR-3722-2026 Date of decision: 04��

Mukesh Kumar

...Petitioner

Versus

Vijay and another

.... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ��

¶12

Present: Ms. Neha Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶13

¶14

��, J. (Oral)

¶15

The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Panchkula, to expedite the disposal of Civil Suit No.406 of 2022 titled Mukesh Kumar vs. Vijay and another (Annexure P-5), which has been pending since 2022, as well as the application filed under Order VI Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the written statement.

¶16

The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner–Mukesh Kumar filed a suit for declaration to the effect that he is the absolute owner of the suit property and also sought a decree of permanent injunction against the respondents–Vijay and another. Notice of the said suit was issued to the respondents, who contested the same by filing their written statement. Issues were framed, and thereafter, the case was fixed for evidence of the parties. During the pendency of the petitioner’s evidence, the respondent moved an application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC read

¶17

ANIL KUMAR 2026.05.05 17:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

CR-3722-2026

¶19

¶20

with Section 151 CPC for amendment of the written statement on 26.05.2025. Notice of the said application was issued to the petitioner, who filed a reply thereto on 13.08.2025. Thereafter, as per the interim orders placed on record, the case has been adjourned on numerous occasions for arguments on the aforesaid application; however, till date, the said application has not been decided.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the respondents are prolonging the proceedings on one pretext or the other; as such, a direction may be issued to the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Panchkula, to decide the application filed under Order VI Rule 17 CPC read with Section 151 CPC expeditiously, as well as to proceed with and conclude the trial of the main suit within a stipulated time frame.

¶22

Considering the limited nature of relief sought, issuance of notice to the respondents is dispensed with, as the same would only result in further delay in the proceedings.

¶23

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the paper book.

¶24

Keeping in view the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, without commenting on the merits of the case, and in light of the interim orders placed on record, it appears that the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Panchkula, has been proceeding at a snail’s pace and has not decided the said application for more than six months. Accordingly, the present revision petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Panchkula, to decide the application filed

¶25

ANIL KUMAR 2026.05.05 17:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶26

CR-3722-2026

¶27

¶28

under Order VI Rules 17 read with Section 151 CPC and also the civil suit as expeditiously as possible.

¶29