CR-1936-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 121 Ashok Kumar Sharma Shakuntala Rathee CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. order dated (Senior Division), defendant/petitioner was struck off. 2. for possession by way of ejectment of defendant from House No. 207 Sector 4, Panchkula as fully detailed in the head note of the plaint (Annexure P learned trial Court through counsel for the first time on 29.07.2024 and sought time to file written statement and reply to the injunction application and matter was adjourned to 07.08.2024. Perusal of the record shows that from 29.07. hearing before the learned trial Court for 05 times, as is evident from zimni orders (Annexure P 2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Ashok Kumar Sharma Versus la Rathee CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Ms. Akanksha Yadav, Advocate for the petitioners. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Challenge in the present revision petition is to the order dated 10.01.2025 (Annexure P-1), passed by the learned nior Division), Panchkula whereby the defence of the petitioner was struck off. Brief facts of the case are that respondent for possession by way of ejectment of defendant from House No. 207 Sector 4, Panchkula as fully detailed in the head note of the plaint (Annexure P-2). Upon notice, the petitioner/defendant learned trial Court through counsel for the first time on 29.07.2024 and sought time to file written statement and reply to the injunction application and matter was adjourned to 07.08.2024. Perusal of the record shows that from 29.07.2024 till 07.11.2024, the case was listed for hearing before the learned trial Court for 05 times, as is evident from orders (Annexure P-3, Colly.); however, t IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-1936-2025 Date of Decision: 28.03.2025 .… Petitioners .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA s. Akanksha Yadav, Advocate for the petitioners. Challenge in the present revision petition is to the interim , passed by the learned Civil Judge whereby the defence of the Brief facts of the case are that respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for possession by way of ejectment of defendant from House No. 207 Sector 4, Panchkula as fully detailed in the head note of the plaint 2). Upon notice, the petitioner/defendant appeared before the learned trial Court through counsel for the first time on 29.07.2024 and sought time to file written statement and reply to the injunction application and matter was adjourned to 07.08.2024. Perusal of the record 2024 till 07.11.2024, the case was listed for hearing before the learned trial Court for 05 times, as is evident from ; however, the petitioner-defendant interim Civil Judge whereby the defence of the plaintiff filed a suit for possession by way of ejectment of defendant from House No. 207 Sector 4, Panchkula as fully detailed in the head note of the plaint appeared before the learned trial Court through counsel for the first time on 29.07.2024 and sought time to file written statement and reply to the injunction application and matter was adjourned to 07.08.2024. Perusal of the record 2024 till 07.11.2024, the case was listed for hearing before the learned trial Court for 05 times, as is evident from defendant RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.02 09:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-1936-2025 had not filed the vide impugned order dated 10.01.2025 (Annexure P petitioner has been struck off submits that ejectment of defendant from note of the plaint before the learned trial Court 29.07.2024 and sought injunction application Thereafter, the plaintiff the learned trial Court from time to time (Annexure P written statement before the period, therefore, learned trial Court It is accordingly, (Annexure P granted one opportunity to file written statement reasonable costs perused the case file in great detail. averments made in the petition equity, good conscience and fair play; this petition is being 2025 -2- not filed the written statement within the scheduled time, as s vide impugned order dated 10.01.2025 (Annexure P petitioner has been struck off by the learned trial Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant submits that respondent-plaintiff filed a suit ejectment of defendant from the suit property note of the plaint (Annexure P-2). The petitioner/defendant appeared before the learned trial Court through counsel for the first time on 29.07.2024 and sought time to file written statement and reply to the injunction application and the matter was adjourned to 07.08.2024 Thereafter, the plaintiff-respondent had filed multiple applications before the learned trial Court from time to time, as is evident from (Annexure P-3, Colly). As such, the petitioner is not able to file his written statement before the learned trial Court within the period, therefore, the defence of the petitioner has been struck off by the learned trial Court vide impugned order dated 10.01.2025 (Annexure P accordingly, prayed that the impugned order dated (Annexure P-1) may be set aside and the petitioner/defendant may be granted one opportunity to file written statement reasonable costs. I have heard learned counsel for the perused the case file in great detail. Without commenting upon merits of the case averments made in the petition, but in view of principles of natural jus equity, good conscience and fair play; this petition is being written statement within the scheduled time, as such, vide impugned order dated 10.01.2025 (Annexure P-1), the defence of the by the learned trial Court. el for the petitioner/defendant, inter alia filed a suit for possession by way of the suit property as fully detailed in the head he petitioner/defendant appeared through counsel for the first time on time to file written statement and reply to the matter was adjourned to 07.08.2024. had filed multiple applications before as is evident from zimni orders 3, Colly). As such, the petitioner is not able to file his learned trial Court within the scheduled the defence of the petitioner has been struck off by the ugned order dated 10.01.2025 (Annexure P-1). prayed that the impugned order dated 10.01.2025 may be set aside and the petitioner/defendant may be granted one opportunity to file written statement, subject to payment of I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant and ithout commenting upon merits of the case as well as the , but in view of principles of natural justice, equity, good conscience and fair play; this petition is being disposed of uch, 1), the defence of the possession by way of as fully detailed in the head through counsel for the first time on time to file written statement and reply to the . had filed multiple applications before orders 3, Colly). As such, the petitioner is not able to file his the defence of the petitioner has been struck off by the 10.01.2025 may be set aside and the petitioner/defendant may be , subject to payment of as well as the tice, RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.02 09:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-1936-2025 without issuing Notice of Motion to the respondent as that will only further delay be matter; the impugned order dated P-1) is set aside. It is directed that the petitioner be granted one effective opportunity to ₹20,000/- to be 28.03.2025 rishu 2025 -3- without issuing Notice of Motion to the respondent as that will only further delay be matter; the impugned order dated ) is set aside. It is directed that the petitioner be granted one effective opportunity to submit his written statement, however, to be paid by the petitioner directly to the respondent .2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable without issuing Notice of Motion to the respondent as that will only further delay be matter; the impugned order dated 10.01.2025 (Annexure ) is set aside. It is directed that the petitioner be granted one effective submit his written statement, however, subject to costs of paid by the petitioner directly to the respondent-plaintiff. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No without issuing Notice of Motion to the respondent as that will only (Annexure ) is set aside. It is directed that the petitioner be granted one effective subject to costs of RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.02 09:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.