C.R. No. 1431 of 2009 1 In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh … C.R. No. 1431 of 2009 Date of decision: April 16,2009 Ram Lal Bajaj ..Petitioner Versus Om Parkash and others . . .Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg Present: Mr. S.S.Godara, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Pankaj Mehta, Advocate for the respondents. ... Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral) This is defendant's revision petition challenging the order dated 5.2.2009 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Fatehabad whereby application filed by the petitioner (Annexure P-4) for recalling the order dated 24.3.2007 proceeding ex parte against him was rejected. As per the averments made in the suit, respondents filed a suit for permanent injunction, against the petitioner and proforma respondents based upon an agreement dated 22.8.2004, restraining the defendants therein from alienating the property in question and from creating any charge over the same. In the aforesaid suit, the trial court issued notice to the petitioner and proforma respondents for 24.3.2007. Since the matter in dispute related to the petitioner and proforma respondents, the petitioner requested respondent No.2 to pursue the matter on his behalf. However, on the date fixed, respondent No.2 did not appear on behalf of the petitioner. As a result, the petitioner was ordered to be proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 24.3.2007 and the case was adjourned to 16.4.2007 for filing written statement etc. It is the further case of the petitioner that in the meantime, the C.R. No. 1431 of 2009 2 relations of the petitioner with respondent No.2 turned sour and thereafter, he came to know about the ex parte order dated 24.3.2007 passed against him. The petitioner also remained ill. He, thereafter, moved an application on 5.2.2009 to allow him to contest the suit after recalling the order dated 24.3.2007. However, the application of the petitioner was dismissed vide order dated 5.2.2009 even without issuing any notice to the other side. Aggrieved from the aforesaid order dated 5.2.2009, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of the present revision petition and has prayed for setting aside the aforesaid order with all consequential benefits. At the motion stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner be allowed to file written statement and he will not claim any new issue and join the suit from the stage as it is. Vide order dated 17.3.2009, notice of motion was issued to the respondents and petitioner was allowed to join the suit from the stage as it existed on that day. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has stated that issues have already been framed in the suit and the respondents have no objection, if the petitioner is allowed to file the written statement subject to the condition that he will not claim any new issue. In view of the above, the present revision petition is allowed to the extent that petitioner is allowed to file written statement subject to the condition that the petitioner will not claim any further issue in the suit. The petitioner is also entitled to join the suit from the stage as it existed on 17.3.2009. It is needless to say that petitioner is also entitled to the opportunity to lead evidence in accordance with law. Revision Petition stands disposed of. April 16, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) nk JUDGE