Rajive Bhalla, J.

1. The petitioners impugn an order dated 25.9.2007, passed by Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bathinda, whereby the petitioners defence has been struck off and as a consequence his right to file a written statement.

2. Counsel for the petitioners states that though the petitioners were granted time to file their written statement, the Presiding Officer was on leave on 26.8.2007. It is submitted that though the file was taken up by another Presiding Officer, the petitioners were not aware of this fact and hence the delay in filing of written statement.

3. However, counsel for the respondents states that petitioners were aware of the fact that the case had been taken up by another Presiding Officer but they did not file the written statement so as to delay the suit.

4. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

5. The contention urged by counsel for the petitioners appears to be prima facie correct. The petitioners obviously would not have drawn any benefit from delaying in the filing of the written statement. Even otherwise, striking off the defence of a defendant and as a consequence, his right to file a written statement is an extreme step that shoul