JUDGMENT

Hima Kohli, J. - The instant appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 06.08.2020 passed by a learned Single Judge whereby, Chamber Appeal registered as OA 122/2019, filed by the appellants/plaintiffs in CS(OS) 182/2019, challenging the order dated 30.09.2020, passed by the learned Joint Registrar closing their right to file the replication in response to the written statement of the respondents/defendants, has been dismissed.

2. The appellants/plaintiffs herein had instituted a suit on the Original Side of the court in April, 2019 with the following prayers:-

"a. A Decree of Declaration thereby declaring that defendants 1 to 6 are not eligible to continue as Trustee of defendant no. 7 Trust and hence cease to be Trustees of the said Trust and consequently appoint an Administrator to frame a scheme for appointing new Trustees in place of defendants 1 to 6, while retaining plaintiffs as trustees.

b. A Decree of Permanent Injunction restraining defendant no.1 from representing herself as a Trustee of Defendant Trust.

c. A Decree of Mandatory Injunction directing the defendants to deposit all original title deeds/lease deeds and other ownership documents pertaining to Sector 55 and Sector 62 Schools, with plaintiff no.1 and also return all assets/properties of defendant Trust or of the schools running under the aegis of defendant Trust, i.e. "Gurugram Public School" to the respective Schools.

d. A Decree of Recovery of amount from defendants 1 to 6, assessed by a valuer appointed by this Hon''ble Court, for the loss suffered by the Sector 55 School of Defendant Trust, due to loss of vehicles bearing nos. HR26BE4849 & HR26BP2892.

e. A Decree of rendition of accounts directing the defendants to render accounts for the period 2011 till date of decree, and further direct the defendants to make good all losses caused by their acts of omission and commission and consequently to replenish all such amounts in to the trust with interest.

f. Award cost of suit in favour of plaintiffs. Such other relief which this Hon''ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may kindly be granted in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants."

3. Summons were issued in the suit and the case was adjourned to 23.07.2019. In the meantime, written statement was filed by the respondents/defendants. When the matter was listed in court on 23.07.2019, learned counsel for the appellants/plaintiffs had stated that he had received a copy of the written statement and the court had granted him four weeks'' to file the replication and the affidavit of admission/denial of documents. The suit was directed to be posted before the learned Joint Registrar on 30.09.2019, for further proceedings. On 30.09.2019, when learned counsel for the appellants/plaintiffs had sought for more time from the learned Joint Registrar to file the replication, noting that over two months had lapsed reckoned from 23.7.2019, he had closed their right to do so and directed that admission/denial of the documents of the respondents/defendants be carried out. The order passed by the learned Joint Registrar on 30.09.2019, reads as under:

"Written statement and affidavit of admission/denial of documents filed on behalf of defendants no.1 to 6. Copy supplied.

No replication to the written statement filed. Learned counsel for plaintiff has submitted that he is going to file replication within two weeks along with appropriate application, but same is strongly opposed by learned counsel for defendants on the ground that as per Chapter 7 Rule 5 Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018, only 45 days has been granted to the plaintiff to file replication including 15 days time of extension on application, but neither such application moved nor replication filed within 30 days. On 23.07.2019, plaintiff sought time to file replication, but no replication has been filed despite lapse of more than two months and no ground is made out for furth