Neutral Citation No:2023:PHHC:161799

CR-2853-2023

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

267

CR-2853-2023

Date of Decision: 15.12.2023

Navjot Singh Kang

....Petitioner

Versus

Prabhjot Kaur and others

....Respondents

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Present:

Mr. Neeraj Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Kulwinder Bhargav, Advocate and

Mr. Sagar Bathla, Advocate

for respondent No.1.

*****

SANJAY VASHISTH, J.(Oral)

1.

Present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner,

challenging the order dated 16.03.2023 (Annexure P-2) passed by

learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sultanpur Lodhi, whereby

defence of petitioner (respondent No.1 before learned trial Court) qua

filing of written reply was struck off in the complaint filed by

respondent-wife under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from

Domestic Violence Act.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on

08.09.2022, petitioner and respondents No.2 and 3 appeared and

thereafter, talks for compromise were initiated, and matter was

adjourned to 11.11.2022 by learned trial Court. When the matter came

up for hearing on 11.11.2022, the same was adjourned for service of

RASHMI

2023.12.20 17:04

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

Neutral Citation No:2023:PHHC:161799

CR-2853-2023

2

respondent No.4. He also submits that service upon respondent No.4

(before learned trial Court) was incomplete till 05.01.2023 and there

was delay on the part of the respondents herein and the complaint was

pending on account of service of the respondents. Learned trial Court

vide order dated 16.03.2023 struck off the defense of the petitioner

and respondents No. 2 and 3. It is stated that the failure of the

petitioner to file the written reply is not intentional. The petitioner

would be seriously prejudiced if he is not permitted to file his written

reply and the defence is struck off. It is prayed that the the petitioner

be granted one opportunity to file the written reply.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner also relies upon the

order dated 20.05.2022, passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court

in CR-1660- 2020, titled as, “Paro and others Vs. Mahindo”, wherein,

in the similar circumstances, to avoid miscarriage of justice, the order

of striking off defense was set-aside, and opportunity of filing of

written statement was granted. Relevant part of the order dated

20.05.2022, says as under:-

“

The provisions of Order 8 Rule 1 of the CPC

no doubt are directory in nature, however, at the same

time the Courts must exercise their discretion to

condone the delay, if any, in filing the written

statement after exercising due circumspection and in

case there appears to be an attempt on the part of the

defendant to engage in dilatory tactics, the Courts

should nip the same unhesitatingly.

Adverting to the case in hand, the petitioners

were granted four opportunities to file their written

statement, however, they failed to do so.

Be that as it may, if the petitioners are not

granted one more opportunity to file their written

statement, they would suffer irreparable loss which in

turn would result in miscarriage of justice. Therefore,

for just and proper adjudication of the case, this

Court deems it appropriate to grant one last effective

RASHMI

2023.12.20 17:04

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

Neutral Citation No:2023:PHHC:161799

CR-2853-2023

3

opportunity to the petitioners to file their written

statement.

In the wake of the above, without issuing

notice to the respondent, to avoid any further delay as

well as expenses which she shall have to incur to

defend these proceedings, the impugned order dated

21.11.2019, is set aside. The instant revision petition

is allowed in the following terms:-

1. The petitioners are granted one last

effective opportunity to file their written

statement.

2. In th