Punjab-Haryana High Court
Hardev Singh And Anr vs Amarjit Kaur And Others on 4 August, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:100857
1
Civil Revision No. 4380 of 2023 2023:PHHC: 100857
118 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Civil Revision No. 4380 of 2023(O&M)
Date of Decision: 04.08.2023
Hardev Singh & Anr.
...Petitioners
Versus
Amarjit Kaur & Ors.
...Respondents
CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARAMJIT SINGH
Present:- Mr. Bikramjit Singh Bajwa, Advocate
For the petitioners.
***
KARAMJIT SINGH, J.
1. The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioners/
defendants against the order dated 28.04.2023 (Annexure P-3) passed by the
Court of learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Batala, whereby the defence of the
petitioners has been struck off on account of non filing of written statement
within prescribed statutory period.
2. The counsel for the petitioners submits that on receiving the
notice of suit, petitioners appeared before the learned trial Court for the first
time on 07.09.2022 and thereafter matter was referred to Lok Adalat vide
order dated 01.11.2022 but the Lok Adalat referred back the same to the trial
Court vide order dated 12.11.2022 and finally the impugned order was
passed by the trial Court on 28.04.2023 whereby the defence of the
petitioners was struck off. The counsel for the petitioners further submits
that there was no intentional delay on the part of the petitioners to file the
written statement. It is further submitted that if the petitioners are not
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:100857
Civil Revision No. 4380 of 2023 2023:PHHC: 100857
allowed to file written statement it will cause great prejudice to them. So,
prayer is made that one more opportunity be granted to the petitioners to file
the written statement.
3. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Salem Advocate Bar Association
Vs. Union of India (2005) 6 SCC 344 held that the proviso to Rule 1 of
Order 8 CPC is directory and not mandatory. Further, in Bharat Kalra Vs.
Raj Kishan Chhabra 2022(3) Apex Court Judgments (SC) 598 the
Hon'ble Apex Court condoned delay of 193 days in filing the written
statement. Recently also, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Raj Process
Equipments & Systems Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Honest Derivatives Pvt.
Ltd.2023(1) RCR(Civil) 511 has held that the ratio laid down in Salem
Advocate Bar Association's case (supra) is to be applied to normal civil
Courts with regard to provision of Order 8 Rule 1 CPC.
4. It is also settled law that procedural provisions of law are meant
for imparting substantial justice and should not be invoked to hamper the
judicial proceedings by following hyper-technical approach. In case the
petitioners are not permitted to file written statement, it is definitely going to
adversely effect the case of the petitioners.
5. In the light of the above, this Court is of the view that
impugned order is liable to be set aside. Consequently, the instant revision
petition is allowed and impugned order dated 28.04.2023 (Annexure P-3) is
set aside and petitioners are given one last opportunity to file their written
statement which is to be taken on record by the learned trial Court subject to
costs of Rs.10,000/- which is to be paid by the petitioners to the other party
on the next date fixed in the trial Court.
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:100857
Civil Revision No. 4380 of 2023 2023:PHHC: 100857
6. Keeping in view the nature of order being passed, no notice is
required to be issued to the respondents. However, if they feel dis-satisfied with
this order, they may move an application to recall the same.
(KARAMJIT SINGH )
04.08.2023 JUDGE
Jiten
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:100857
3 of 3
