2025:HHC:31866 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CMPMO No. 173 of 2020 Decided on : 16.09.2025 Hem Raj …Petitioner Versus Leela Devi and others …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Hem Chand Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. H.S. Rangra, Advocate, for respondents No.1 to 4. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioner has assailed order dated 09.01.2020, passed by learned Civil Judge, Karsog, District Mandi, H.P, in Civil Suit No. 45/2019, in terms whereof, the application filed under Order XXIII, Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’) by the respondents herein, was allowed and respondents were allowed to withdraw the plaint, with liberty to file a fresh plaint on the same ground. 1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:31866 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order is perverse. He submitted that no case was made out by the plaintiffs before the learned Trial Court for the withdrawal of the suit and this aspect of the matter was not appreciated by the learned Trial Court in the correct perspective. He submitted that not only this, the suit was filed in the year 2018 and was withdrawn in the year 2020 and cost etc. were also not paid to the petitioner while passing the impugned order. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that in light of the fact that there was a technical defect in the plaint, which would have led to the dismissal of the plaint on said count, learned Trial Court in the interest of justice passed the order, which cannot be said to be a perverse order. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the copy of the plaint, which was made available for the perusal of the Court, this Court is of the considered view that the order, in terms whereof, the plaintiffs were allowed to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit 3 2025:HHC:31866 on the same cause, cannot be faulted with, same and except that while allowing the application, the interest of the defendants therein ought to have been protected by granting cost in favour of the defendants. 5. Therefore, though this Court is not interfering with the impugned order on merit, but the order passed by the learned Trial Court is made subject to payment of cost of Rs.5000/- by the respondents herein to the petitioner. In case, any fresh suit is filed by the plaintiffs, then the same will have to be accompanied by a bank draft in the name of the defendant for an amount of Rs.5000/-. If needful is done, then the suit shall be entertained by the learned Trial Court, otherwise, the suit shall not be entertained. 6. The petition is disposed of in above terms. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge September 16, 2025 (Shivank Thakur)