C.R. No. 5512 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 5512 of 2010 Date of Decision: 17.09.2010 State of Haryana and others .... Petitioners Versus M/s. Integrated Industech Services Pvt. Ltd. ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present : Mr. Gaurav Dhir, DAG Haryana for the petitioners Ms. Kanchan Sharma, Advocate for the respondent 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL) 1. Present petition is filed challenging order dated 22.7.2010 passed by Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Chandigarh whereby time sought to file written statement was declined by observing that after the expiry of 90 days from the date of service of summons time can not granted to the defendants to file written statement and defence of the defendants-petitioners was directed to be struck off. 2. Mr. Gaurav Dhir, Deputy Advocate General, Hayana appearing on behalf of defendants-petitioners argued that written statement could not be filed because department was busy in collecting the documents and now written statement is ready and shall be filed within such time as directed by this Court. Learned C.R. No. 5512 of 2010 2 counsel for the State further stated that provisions of Order 8 Rule 1 C.P.C. are not mandatory but are directive and when justification is placed before this Court for not filing the written statement within 90 days then Court is competent to extend time in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. 3. Ms. Kanchan Sehgal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-plaintiff vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioners. She argues that no sufficient reason is shown by the department for not filing the written statement within 90 days from the date of service of the summons as required by Order 8 Rule 1 C.P.C. She further states that now after expiry of 90 days petitioners- defendants should not be permitted to file written statement and trial Court shall be permitted to decide the suit at the earliest. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. In the present case defendants were served on 11.2.2010. On 22.7.2010 again time was sought by the defendant- State to file written statement on the ground that written statement is under preparation. However, the same was dismissed by the trial Court vide impugned order. In view of the statement made by Deputy Advocate General, Haryana that written statement is ready and shall be filed without any delay within such time as fixed by this Court. I am of the view that time should be granted to the defendants to file written statement. Even Hon'ble the Apex Court in 2005(4) RCR 747 has held that provisions of Order 8 Rule 1 C.P.C. are only directory and not mandatory. 6. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, C.R. No. 5512 of 2010 3 petition is allowed. Impugned order is quashed. Petitioners- defendants are directed to file written statement before the trial Court within 15 days from today subject to payment of costs of Rs. 2500/- to the plaintiff. (ALOK SINGH) 17.09.2010 JUDGE reena