Mahesh Kumar Gait vs Ankush Sharma
2024 Latest Caselaw 19341 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Mahesh Kumar Gait vs Ankush Sharma on 4 November, 2024

                                   Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:142809




CR-6342-2024
        2024
                                                                            1

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                          CHANDIGARH
(121)
                                                               CR-6342-2024
                                                                         2024
                                                Date of Decision:- 04.11.2024
                                                                         2024

Mahesh Kumar Gait
                                                               ......Petitioner

                                     Versus

Ankush Sharma
                                                             ......Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN
                    ****
Present:      Mr. Sachin Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

                    ****

ALOK JAIN,
     JAIN J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated

10.04.2024,, wherebyy the defence of the defendant (petitioner herein) to file

the written statement was struck off. Further thereto, the counsel for the

petitioner brings to Court's attention that the matter is not yet proceeded ed

with and no evidence has been recorded and to substantiate the same, the

counsel for the petitioner relies upon the order dated 28.10.2024 which

demonstrates that no PW was present on the said date date.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that

one more opportunity be granted to the petitioner to exercise his right of

defence and he shall file the written statement within one week from today

so that the date already fixed i.e. 12.12.2024 before the trial Court is

utilized to proceed further in the matter.

3. Heard learned counsel for the peti petitioner at length.

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:142809

CR-6342-2024

4. Although the defence has been struck off only on account of

delay, as the petitioner had not filed the written statement within four

months, moreover, moreover it is a settled principle of law that Order 8 Rule 1 CPC is

not mandatory in nature nature and in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of "Kailash Kailash Vs. Nankhu and others others", (2005))

4 SCC 480 and followed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal

No. 3788 of 2022, the preposition is made clear and the written statement

could be permitted to be filed beyond the prescribed period and the

respondent-plaintiff plaintiff can be compensated wi with cost. Also due to the fact that

denying the benefit of filing a written statement would be detrimental to the

interest of the respondent.

5. The issuance of notice of motion shall only procrastinate the

trial, therefore, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the

petitioner to file the written statement within 15 days from today, however,

subject ubject to payment of cost of Rs. 25,000/-

25,000/ to be deposited in the Trial Court

for compensating the plaintiff within 15 days from today.

6. The cost though is on the higher side but the same ha has been

imposed keeping in view the allegations levelled by the plaintiff in the suit

which were not rebutted by the petitioner for such a long time.

7. With the above directions, the present petition stands disposed

of.

(ALOK JAIN) JUDGE 04.11.2024 Parul

Whether speaking/reasoned:

                           speaking/reasoned:-        Yes/No
                   Whether Reportable:-               Yes/No


                                  2 of 2