1 ( 2026:HHC:9112 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.52 of 2026 Date of Decision : 23.03.2026 M/s Kapoor Enterprises ...Petitioner Versus State Bank of India ...Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma. Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Hitender K. Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents : - Romesh Verma, Judge(oral) The present petition has arisen out of the order as passed by the learned Civil Judge, Karsog,District Mandi, dated 29.11.2025, whereby the application 1led by the petitioner, under Section 148 of C.P.C to condone the delay in 1ling the written statement has been rejected. 2. The facts of the case are that the plainti6/respondent has 1led a suit before the learned trial Court against the present petitioner. As per the paper book, it reveals that on 05.01.2024 notice issued to the defendant was received unserved and the plainti6 was directed to take fresh steps for the service of the defendant. On 05.01.2024, time was 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 ( 2026:HHC:9112 ) sought on behalf of the learned counsel for the defendant for 1ling written statement and the same was allowed and thereafter the matter was 1xed on 03.05.2024. On 03.05.2024, the counsel for the plainti6 submitted before the Court that there is possibility of compromise between the parties, therefore, on his request, the matter was adjourned for 11.05.2024. Thereafter, the parties apprised the Court that compromise could not be e6ected and on 16.10.2024, time was granted to the defendant to 1le written statement subject to last opportunity and the matter was listed on 02.12.2024. Again on 07.04.2025, the parties informed the Court that there are chances of compromise between the parties and the learned Civil Judge, Karsog, District Mandi, posted the matter for e6ecting compromise before the National Lok Adalat. When the matter was listed before the National Lok Adalat on 10.05.2025, no compromise could be e6ected between the parties and consequently, the defendant 1led an application under Section 148 of C.P.C for extension of time for 1ling written statement. The learned Civil Judge, Karsog, Mandi, vide its order dated 29.11.2025, dismissed the application with cost of Rs. 1000/-. and came to the conclusion that various 3 ( 2026:HHC:9112 ) opportunities have been granted to the defendant for 1ling written statement, however, the needful has not been done. 3. Feeling dissatis1ed against impugned order, the petitioner has approached this Court for setting-aside order dated 29.11.2025. The perusal of the record reveals that though various opportunities were granted to the defendant to 1le written statement. The fact remains that the parties apprised the Court that there is possibility of compromise and for that purpose case was also listed before the National Lok Adalat, Karsog, Mandi. However, the same could not be e6ected. 4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case and as a matter of indulgence, time is extended for placing on record the written statement and the same is taken on record. However, the same shall be subject to the payment of cost of Rs. 15,000/- to the plainti6. Therefore, the impugned order is quashed and set-aside and the learned Civil Judge, Karsog Mandi is directed to take on record the written statement 1led by the present petitioner/defendant. It is made clear that in case cost of Rs.15000/- is not paid by the defendant,in that event the impugned order shall revive. Learned Civil Judge, Karsog, Mandi is directed to take the matter on 07.04.2026 and 4 ( 2026:HHC:9112 ) thereafter issues notices to both the parties and to proceed in the matter. 5. In view of above, present petition stands disposed o6. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Romesh Verma), Judge 23.03.2026 (veena)