IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 159 of 2026 Decided on : 16.04.2026 Krishan & others ...Petitioners. Versus Meera & others ..Respondents. Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners: Mr. Pawan K. Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Nemo. Romesh Verma, Judge(oral) The instant petition arises out of the order passed by the learned Civil Judge, Karsog, District Mandi, H.P. dated 16.01.2026, whereby an application filed by petitioners/ defendants No. 1 to 4 under the provisions of Section 148 read with Section 151 of CPC for enlargement of time in filing the written statement has been rejected. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff– respondents filed a suit for declaration, permanent prohibitory and mandatory injunction before the learned Trial Court. The said suit was instituted in the year 2023. The present petitioners/defendants were duly served, however, instead of 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 filing the written statement, they filed an application for enlargement of time for filing the written statement. 3. A copy of the application has been appended with the present petition, and it reveals that, as per the averments made therein, the petitioners/defendants had to inspect old records before filing the written statement and it took sufficient time for collecting the relevant information and records, and therefore, the written statement could not be filed within time. 4. The said application was contested by the other side, wherein it was averred that since the statutory period of 90 days had elapsed, therefore, as per the mandate of Order 8 Rule 1 CPC, the present petitioners/defendants were barred from filing the written statement. 5. The learned Trial Court, vide its order dated 16.01.2026, dismissed the said application on the ground that there was a huge delay in filing the written statement, despite several opportunities having been granted to the defendants, which they failed to avail. Consequently, the prayer of the present petitioners was declined. 6. A perusal of the order reveals that the learned Civil Judge, Karsog, District Mandi, H.P. has passed a reasoned order and there is no infirmity in the same. However, in the interest of justice and as a matter of indulgence, the written statement filed 3 along with the application for enlargement of time is permitted to be taken on record, subject to payment of Rs. 25,000/- to be paid to the present respondents. In case the petitioners/defendants fail to pay the amount of Rs. 25,000/- to the present respondents within a period of four weeks from today, in such eventuality, the benefit of the present order shall not accrue to them, and the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to proceed in the matter in accordance with law. 7. Consequently, after permitting the present petitioners to place the written statement on record, the learned Trial Court is directed to proceed with the matter. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of, in the aforesaid terms. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Romesh Verma) Judge April 16, 2026 (Nisha)