1 ( 2025:HHC:11515 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CMPMO No. 58 of 2025 Decided on: 25.04.2025 State of H.P. and others .. …..Petitioners Versus Kishore Kumar and another …...Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the Petitioners: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Navlesh Verma & Ms. Sharmila Patial, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Raj Negi, Deputy Advocate General. For the Respondents: Mr. Yuyutsu Singh Thakur, Advocate Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge ( Oral ) Aggrieved by the order dated 17.01.2024, whereby the right of filing written statement has been struck off by learned Trial Court, the State has filed the instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. A perusal of the order passed by the learned Trial Court would go to indicate that the right to file written statement on behalf of the petitioners No. 1 and 3 has been struck off primarily on the ground that the period of limitation for filing written statement stood expired. 3. I really wonder what the learned Trial Court means by period of limitation because prescribed period of limitation as per amended Civil Procedure Code is directory and not mandatory. (Refer: Zolba versus 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?Yes 2 ( 2025:HHC:11515 ) Keshao and others, (2008)11 SCC 769, Desh Raj versus Bal Kishan (dead) through proposed Legal representative Ms. Rohini, (2020) 2 SCC 708 and Atcom Technologies Limited versus Y.A.Chunawala and company and others, (2018) 6 SCC 639). 4. Obviously, in such circumstances, the learned Trial Court was required to gived some reasons as to why the time cannot be extended for filing written statement given the fact that it had already issued notice in the application filed by one of the petitioners i.e. petitioner No.2 for enlargement of time under Section 148 read with Section 151 CPC. 5. In the given facts and circumstances, I find merit in this petition and the same is accordingly allowed. Consequently, the impugned order dated 17.01.2024 is set-aside. However, it is made clear that in case those of the petitioners, who have not filed the written statement, fail to file the written statement before the learned Trial Court, then the order dated 17.01.2024 shall automatically revive. 6. The parties shall appear before the learned Trial Court on 09.05.2025. 7. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (Tarlok Singh Chauhan) 25th April, 2025. Judge (yogesh/pankaj)