161 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RAMESH KRISHNA @ KRISHNA DEVI AND OTHERS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr. Mr. Jagdeep Singh Rana, Advocate for the respondents. HARKESH MANUJA By way of present revision petition, challenge has been laid to an order dated 07.08.2023 passed by Division), Tosham respondent Nos.1 to 3 with liberty to file 2. Briefly stating, respondent Nos.1 to 3 being plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration, mandatory injunction as well as permanent injunction against petitioner situated within revenue estate of the petitioner-defendant No.1 appeared through counsel and the following order was passed : on ad interim injunction. Defendant suffered a statement that he will not break the wall exist and repair his room and also not alienate his possession. In view of the statement IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: Versus KRISHNA @ KRISHNA DEVI AND OTHERS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Sudhanshu Makkar, Advocate for the Mr. Jagdeep Singh Rana, Advocate for the respondents. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) By way of present revision petition, challenge has been laid to dated 07.08.2023 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Tosham whereby, an application filed at the instance of respondent Nos.1 to 3-plaintiffs seeking permission t with liberty to file a fresh one stands allowed. Briefly stating, respondent Nos.1 to 3 being plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration, mandatory injunction as well as permanent injunction against petitioner-defendant No.1 with re situated within revenue estate of Tosham on 15. defendant No.1 appeared through counsel and the following order was passed :- “Power of attorney on behalf of defendant No.1 filed. Heard interim injunction. Defendant suffered a statement that he will not break the wall existing between shop and room. He and repair his room and also not alienate his possession. In view of the statement of defendant. Case is adjourned IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-6143-2023 Date of Decision: September 25, 2025 ........Petitioner KRISHNA @ KRISHNA DEVI AND OTHERS ........Respondents HARKESH MANUJA Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jagdeep Singh Rana, Advocate for the respondents. By way of present revision petition, challenge has been laid to learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. whereby, an application filed at the instance of plaintiffs seeking permission to withdraw the suit fresh one stands allowed. Briefly stating, respondent Nos.1 to 3 being plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration, mandatory injunction as well as permanent injunction defendant No.1 with respect to the suit property on 15.05.2023. On 16.05.2023, defendant No.1 appeared through counsel and the Power of attorney on behalf of defendant No.1 filed. Heard interim injunction. Defendant suffered a statement that he will not between shop and room. He will only affix door and repair his room and also not alienate his possession. In view of the adjourned to 07.08.2023 for filing 2023 September 25, 2025 Petitioner By way of present revision petition, challenge has been laid to learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. whereby, an application filed at the instance of suit Briefly stating, respondent Nos.1 to 3 being plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration, mandatory injunction as well as permanent injunction suit property 16.05.2023, defendant No.1 appeared through counsel and the Power of attorney on behalf of defendant No.1 filed. Heard interim injunction. Defendant suffered a statement that he will not door and repair his room and also not alienate his possession. In view of the TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.09.30 23:15 I agree to specified portions of this document CR-6143-2023 -2- written statement and reply to injunction application. Defendant is directed to remain bound by his statement suffered today in Court.” 3. Thereafter on 07.08.2023, respondent Nos.1 to 3-plaintiffs sought permission of the trial Court to withdraw the suit alleging technical defects, along with permission to file fresh one. The said prayer was accepted by the learned trial Court vide its order dated 07.08.2023 and the same has been impugned by way of the present revision petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that unless any technical defect was specified in the impugned order, respondent Nos.1 to 3-plaintiffs could not have been permitted to file fresh suit on the same cause of action and thus, the order passed by learned trial Court needs to be set aside. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3-plaintiffs submits that the suit was at the initial stage and even no written statement was preferred by that time before the learned trial Court by petitioner-defendant No.1 and thus, there was no jurisdictional error in the discretion exercised by the learned trial Court while permitting the plaintiffs to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh one on the same cause of action. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book. 7. In the present case, though the suit was admittedly at the initial stage; no written statement has been preferred at the instance of petitioner-defendant No.1. Be that as it may, once the permission granted in favour of respondent Nos.1 to 3-plaintiffs for seeking withdrawal of the TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.09.30 23:15 I agree to specified portions of this document CR-6143-2023 -3- suit with liberty to file a fresh one on the same cause of action has been objected to by the petitioner-defendant No.1, in such circumstances, the order dated 07.08.2023 needs to be set aside and the civil suit No.156 of 2023 titled as Krishna @ Krishna Devi and Ors. Vs. Ramesh and Ors. is ordered to be restored at its original number, as the prayer made on behalf of the plaintiffs for seeking withdrawal of the suit with liberty to file fresh one on the same cause of action cannot be dissected and dealt with partially. 7. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the order dated 07.08.2023 passed by the learned trial Court is set aside. The parties are directed to appear before the learned trial Court on 14.10.2025 through their respective counsel. It is made clear that respondent Nos.1-3/plaintiffs shall be at liberty to move appropriate application in accordance with law. 25.09.2025 (HARKESH MANUJA) Tejwinder JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.09.30 23:15 I agree to specified portions of this document