IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

126 CR-1346-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision: 05.03.2025 Ludhiana Improvement Trust ...Petitioner(s)

Vs.

Charanjit Singh & Others ...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Vivek Dahiya, Advocate for Dr. P.K. Sekhon, Advocate for the petitioner.

***

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

Present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed seeking quashing and setting aside of impugned order dated 09.12.2024 (Annexure P4) passed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Ludhiana whereby defence of the petitioner was struck off in Civil Suit No.CS/3984/2019 titled as “Charanjit Singh Vs. Vishva Mittar Mahajan & Another”; and further for setting aside order dated 18.01.2025 (Annexure P7) passed by Civil Judge, Junior Division, Ludhiana, whereby application (Annexure P5) for review of order dated 09.12.2024 and for placing on record written statement, was dismissed.

2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one opportunity be granted to the petitioner for filing written statement. It is submitted that grave injustice will be caused to the petitioner in case the petitioner is not permitted to file written statement. It is submitted that delay in filing the written statement was neither intentional nor deliberate. Moreover, the matter was delayed due to the delayed filing of reply by the respondent/plaintiff to the petitioner’s application for producing original documents. It is accordingly prayed that the present petition be allowed.

3. No other argument is made on behalf of the petitioner.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file in great detail.

5. Brief facts of the case are that on 04.07.2019 plaintiffs/ Respondents No.1 and 2 filed a Civil Suit (Annexure P1), for mandatory injunction directing pro-forma respondent/defendant No.1 to get the property No.132 transferred in favour of plaintiffs from petitioner/defendant No.2. Notice in the said suit was issued to petitioner/defendant No.2 and defendant No.1 on 08.07.2019. Petitioner appeared on 15.10.2019 and was directed to file written statement on the next date. On 05.02.2020, the petitioner filed an application for producing original documents and case was adjourned for filing reply to it by plaintiffs. Thereafter, the case was adjourned by order due to Covid-19. On 06.11.2020, case was taken up for the first time after Covid-19. Till then no reply was filed by plaintiffs to the application filed by petitioner for producing original documents. Reply was finally filed by the plaintiffs to the said application on 10.12.2024. In the meantime, Vide order dated 15.02.2024, defendant No.1 was proceeded against ex parte and on the same day, case was adjourned to 14.03.2024 for filing written statement on behalf of petitioner despite the fact the application of the petitioner directing plaintiffs for producing original documents was neither decided nor reply to it was filed. On 14.03.2024, petitioner brought to the notice of the Court that his application for production of original documents is pending and case was adjourned to 02.04.2024 for production of documents. On 02.04.2024, some documents were supplied to the counsel for petitioner; and plaintiffs sought some time to produce other documents and case was adjourned to 30.04.2024 for supply of remaining documents. On 30.04.2024, reply to application for giving direction to plaintiffs to produce original document filed. Vide order dated 27.08.2024, application for production of documents stood disposed of; and case was adjourned to 12.09.2024 for filing written statement on behalf of petitioner. On 09.12.2024, written statement was not filed and case was adjourned to 03.10.2024. On 18.10.2024, written statement was not filed and case was adjourned to 04.11.2024 for filing written statement subject to last opportunity. On 04.11.2024 also, written statement was not filed and case was adjourned to 05.11.2024