Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 83087 (PNJ)

KULDEEP DHULL v. AJIT SINGH

CR/4888/2025 · 2025-07-29

Sudeepti Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CR-4888-2025 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 126 CR-4888-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 29.07.2025 Kuldeep Dhull ...Petitioner Versus Ajit Singh ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. Pranshul Dhull, Advocate for the petitioner. **** SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J. (ORAL) 1. Present civil revision has been filed for setting aside of order dated 19.05.2025 passed by Learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kaithal in case bearing No.CS/1812/2024 titled as ‘Ajit Singh Vs. Kuldeep’, whereby the defence of the petitioner was struck off. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the written statement and reply to the stay application was ready, however, nephew of the petitioner who was engaged by him as his counsel died in road accident on 11.05.2025, therefore, the written statement and reply to the stay application could not be filed and it is only due to unfortunate and unavoidable circumstances that the written statement and reply to stay application could not be filed. He further contends that one last opportunity be granted to file the same. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the whole file of the case. 4. A perusal of the file shows that the nephew of the petitioner Yogesh Mehta 2025.07.30 12:36 I agree to specified portions of this document CR-4888-2025 [2] who was engaged by him as his counsel died in road accident on 11.05.2025 because of which written statement and reply to stay application could not be filed. It is due to unfortunate incident that the petitioner could not file written statement and reply to stay application. In these circumstances, justice demands that one opportunity is required to be granted to the petitioner to file written statement and reply to stay application. 5. In view of the above, the present revision petition is allowed and order dated 19.05.2025 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kaithal, is set aside. The petitioner is directed to file written statement and reply to the stay application subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- as costs to be deposited by the petitioner with the Women Bar Room in Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. 6. Since, the next date fixed before the trial Court is stated to be 22.11.2025, therefore, Ld. Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kaithal is directed to allow the petitioner to file written statement and reply to stay application on or before 22.11.2025. 29.07.2025 (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) Yogesh JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No Yogesh Mehta 2025.07.30 12:36 I agree to specified portions of this document