CR-4345-2024 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 121+234 Sudesh Kumari and others Maneesh Ka CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. taken on record. 2. Constitution of India 29.09.2022 passed by the learned trial Court in CS/1758/2022 titled as ‘Maneesh Kareer petitioners/defendants No. 1 to 3 has been struck of on account of non filing of written statement. 3. inter alia submits that of the property bearing No. ND Mohalla Purani Kacheheri, Tehsil and District Jalandhar, in the head note of the plaint 2024 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sudesh Kumari and others Versus Maneesh Kareer and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Ms. Rishma Verma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Ashish Verma, Advocate for respondent No. 1. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Memo of Appearance filed on behalf of respondent No. 1 is taken on record. Prayer in this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is for setting aside the impugned order dated 29.09.2022 passed by the learned trial Court in CS/1758/2022 titled as Kareer vs. Sudesh Kumari & Ors. petitioners/defendants No. 1 to 3 has been struck of on account of non filing of written statement. Learned counsel for the petitioner/defendants submits that respondent No. 1-plaintiff filed a suit of the property bearing No. ND-260 Measuring 06 Marlas situated at Mohalla Purani Kacheheri, Tehsil and District Jalandhar, in the head note of the plaint (Annexure P IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-4345-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 25.04.2025 .… Petitioners .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Ms. Rishma Verma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Ashish Verma, Advocate for respondent No. 1. on behalf of respondent No. 1 is ion petition under Article 227 of the is for setting aside the impugned order dated 29.09.2022 passed by the learned trial Court in CS/1758/2022 titled as Sudesh Kumari & Ors.’whereby the defence of the petitioners/defendants No. 1 to 3 has been struck of on account of non- Learned counsel for the petitioner/defendants No. 1 to 3, plaintiff filed a suit for partition 260 Measuring 06 Marlas situated at Mohalla Purani Kacheheri, Tehsil and District Jalandhar, as fully detailed (Annexure P-2). Notice was issued to the on behalf of respondent No. 1 is ion petition under Article 227 of the is for setting aside the impugned order dated 29.09.2022 passed by the learned trial Court in CS/1758/2022 titled as ’whereby the defence of the , partition 260 Measuring 06 Marlas situated at as fully detailed Notice was issued to the RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.25 18:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-4345-2024 (O&M) defendants; co-defendants have file the written statement within a period of 90 days as prescribed under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC impugned order dated application filed for recalling of the aforesaid order has also been dismissed by the learned trial Court vide order dated (Annexure P defendants No. 1 to 3 in a suit for partition of the aforesaid property, by metes and bounds and would be seriously prejudiced, if they are not allowed to put forth their case by the impugned order dated petitioner/defendant written statement 4. plaintiff submits the he has ‘no objection’, in case, granted to statement. 5. case file in great detail. 6. averments made in the petition equity, good conscience and fair play 29.09.2022 i to 3 be granted one effective opportunity to 2024 (O&M) -2- ; and the petitioner/defendants No. 1 defendants have appeared before the learned trial Court, but failed to written statement within a period of 90 days as prescribed under VIII Rule 1 CPC. As such, their defence impugned order dated 29.09.2022. It is further submitted that application filed for recalling of the aforesaid order has also been dismissed by the learned trial Court vide order dated (Annexure P-1). Learned counsel submits that the petitioners are defendants No. 1 to 3 in a suit for partition of the aforesaid property, by s and bounds and would be seriously prejudiced, if they are not allowed to put forth their case by filing written statement. the impugned order dated 29.02.2022 petitioner/defendants No. 1 to 3 may be granted one opportunity to file written statement, subject to payment of reasonable costs Learned counsel appearing for contesting respondent No. 1 plaintiff submits the he has ‘no objection’, in case, granted to the petitioner/defendants No. 1 to 3 I have heard learned counsel for 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 justice, equity, good conscience and fair play 29.09.2022 is set aside. It is directed that t granted one effective opportunity to the petitioner/defendants No. 1 to 3 along with their before the learned trial Court, but failed to written statement within a period of 90 days as prescribed under s such, their defence was struck off vide 29.09.2022. It is further submitted that the application filed for recalling of the aforesaid order has also been dismissed by the learned trial Court vide order dated 11.07.2023 1). Learned counsel submits that the petitioners are defendants No. 1 to 3 in a suit for partition of the aforesaid property, by s and bounds and would be seriously prejudiced, if they are not ritten statement. It is prayed that may be set aside and the may be granted one opportunity to file , subject to payment of reasonable costs. appearing for contesting respondent No. 1- plaintiff submits the he has ‘no objection’, in case, one opportunity is No. 1 to 3 to file their written I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the 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; the impugned order dated It is directed that the petitioner/defendants No. 1 granted one effective opportunity to submit their written statement, along with their before the learned trial Court, but failed to written statement within a period of 90 days as prescribed under was struck off vide the application filed for recalling of the aforesaid order has also been 023 1). Learned counsel submits that the petitioners are defendants No. 1 to 3 in a suit for partition of the aforesaid property, by s and bounds and would be seriously prejudiced, if they are not is prayed that may be set aside and the may be granted one opportunity to file one opportunity is to file their written perused the as well as the , but in view of principles of natural justice, dated submit their written statement, RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.25 18:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-4345-2024 (O&M) however, subject to costs of respondent No. 1 25.04.2025 rishu 2024 (O&M) -3- subject to costs of ₹5,000/- to be respondent No. 1-plaintiff. The instant revision petition stands Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. .2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable to be paid by them directly to The instant revision petition stands disposed of, accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No directly to RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.25 18:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.