CR-5092-2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 163 CR-5092-2026 Date of decision :- 14.07.2026 Sandeep Yadav .... Petitioner Versus Rambir Singh (since deceased) through legal heirs and others .... Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present: Mr. Rakesh Dhiman, Advocate for the petitioner. **** AMARJOT BHATTI J. 1. Petitioner/defendant No. 6 filed civil revision against impugned order dated 03.11.2025 (Annexure P-14) and order dated 01.05.2026 (Annexure P-17) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gurugram in Civil Suit No. CS/2753/2019 titled “Rambir Singh (deceased) through LRs Vs. Rajbala & Ors.”, whereby the trial Court has illegally and unlawfully passed impugned orders vide which the defence of petitioner/defendant No. 6 was struck off for not filing the written statement. 2. Learned counsel representing petitioner/defendant No. 6 stated that Rambir Singh (deceased) through legal heirs filed suit for permanent and mandatory injunction against Rajbala and others (Annexure P-1). Notice was issued to defendants and as per order dated 30.10.2024 (Annexure P-6), counsel for petitioner/defendant No. 6 appeared and he was directed to file written statement on 20.02.2025. Before the next date of hearing, talk LALIT SHARMA 2026.07.16 11:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-5092-2026 -2- regarding compromise started between the parties and Memorandum of Understanding dated 16.01.2025 is Annexure P-7 and in pursuance of this, statements of parties were recorded, which are Annexures P-8 and P-9. Zimni order dated 20.02.2025 is Annexure P-10. Case was adjourned for 01.05.2025 and as per zimni order dated 01.05.2025 (Annexure P-11), the Court declined to pass compromise decree and directed defendants No. 5 and 6 to file their written statements on 07.08.2025. Thereafter, as per zimni order dated 06.08.2025 (Annexure P-12), file was taken up as Presiding Officer was on leave and thereafter, it was taken up on 18.08.2025, again directing defendant No. 6 to file his written statement granting him the last opportunity. On 03.11.2025, defence of present petitioner/defendant No. 6 was struck off vide zimni order Annexure P-14. Present petitioner/defendant No. 6 filed application (Annexure P-15) to allow him to file his written statement. Written statement (Annexure P-16) was ready but it could not be filed due to aforesaid circumstances. Application filed by petitioner/defendant No. 6 under Section 151 CPC was also declined vide order dated 01.05.2026 (Annexure P-17). It is pointed out that suit filed by respondent No. 1/plaintiff is contested by petitioner/defendant No. 6. His material rights are involved. Compromise arrived at between the parties was not accepted by the Court. Now, respondent No. 1/plaintiff is also contesting the suit. Therefore, he may be granted one opportunity to file his written statement. 3. Factual position is clear from the documents on record. Therefore, no purpose would be served by issuing notice to respondents. LALIT SHARMA 2026.07.16 11:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-5092-2026 -3- 4. I have considered the aforesaid factual position. The case is at initial stage. It is fixed for filing of replication, if any, otherwise for framing of issues, on 09.10.2026. Aforesaid factual position cannot be ignored that some time was consumed regarding compromise arrived at between the parties and in pursuance of same, statements were also recorded. However, learned trial Court did not pass decree on compromise and proceeded with trial in this case. Even at present, case is at initial stage. Respondent No. 1/plaintiff, now represented through legal heirs, will not suffer any prejudice in case petitioner/defendant No. 6 is permitted to file his written statement. It is always in the interest of justice that case is decided on merits by giving opportunity to both the sides to lead their respective evidence. So far as respondent No. 1/plaintiff through legal heirs is concerned, their interest can be compensated by imposing cost on petitioner/defendant No. 6. In view of above, present civil revision preferred by petitioner/defendant No. 6 is allowed. Impugned orders referred above are, accordingly set aside. Petitioner/defendant No. 6 is granted one opportunity to file written statement on the next date of hearing, subject to payment of cost of ₹10,000/- to be paid to respondent No. 1/plaintiff, now represented through legal heirs. 5. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of accordingly. (AMARJOT BHATTI) JUDGE 14.07.2026 lalit Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No LALIT SHARMA 2026.07.16 11:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document