IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CR NO.1728/2009 Date of Decision:27.3.2009. State of Haryana and others ..........Petitioners. Versus Sadhu and others ..........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present: Mr.Anil Rathee,Addl.A.G.Haryana for the petitioners. JASWANT SINGH,J(Oral). Petitioners-defendants 1 to 3 i.e. State of Haryana through Collector, Karnal, Tehsildar Karnal and Halqa Patwari, Village Dilawra, Tehsil and District Karnal, have filed the present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying for setting aside the order dated 6.1.2009 passed by the learned Addl.Civil Judge (Senior Division)Karnal, striking off their defence for not filing written statement within 90 days in a suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction filed by respondents-plaintiffs 1 to 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the written statement, on behalf of defendant-State, was ready for filing on the said date, however, could not be filed because it was not signed by the Tehsildar as he was away to Jammu and Kashmir on election duty. It is further submitted that at the same stage, fresh notices were issued for service upon one of the petitioners i.e. defendant no.3 i.e. Halqa Patwari, whereas the other private defendants were given time for filing written statement. It is also contended that in the face of sufficient reasons for non- filing of the written statement within 90 days, the cause of the defendants should not CR NO.1728/2009 2 suffer. According to him the written statement is ready to be filed. After hearing the learned counsel and perusing the impugned order, I am of the considered opinion that to advance the interest of justice, petitioners- defendants should be given one opportunity to file written statement. It is well settled that provisions of Order 8 Rule 1 CPC, which prescribe a period of 90 days for filing of the written statement have been held to be directory in nature by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kailash v. Nanhku and others, 2005(2) RCR (Civil)379; by this Court in Surender Singh and others v. Omvati and others,2005(3) RCR (Civil) 786; and Housing Board Haryana v. Suresh and others, 2008(3) RCR (Civil) 865. It has further been held therein that in exceptional circumstances the Court can extend the time beyond 90 days for filing the written statement so as to avoid injustice being caused to the defendant(s). In view of the above stated legal position and the fact that defendant no.3 was yet to be served and sufficient reasons existed for not filing written statement on time, the impugned order dated 6.1.2009 is set aside and the petitioners-defendants 1 to 3 are permitted to file their reply within three weeks from today subject to payment of costs of Rs.4000/-, to be disbursed amongst respondents-plaintiffs 1 to 4 in equal share. This order is being passed without issuing notice to the respondents- plaintiffs to avoid unnecessary delay and save them from litigation expenses. Petition is allowed in the above terms. 27.3.2009. (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge