C.R. No. 7191 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 7191 of 2010 Date of decision : 17.1.2011 Mohinder Singh and others ......Petitioners Versus Suksham Kumar and others .......Respondents ******* CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present : Mr. R.P.S. Rana, Advocate, for the petitioners. **** SABINA, J. Plaintiff-Sham Sunder had filed suit for possession of portion of the house in dispute. Notice was issued to the defendant Piara Singh through his legal representatives. Defendants appeared before the trial Court on 11.2.2009 and thereafter the case was adjourned for filing of written statement by the defendants. On 16.4.2009, an application was moved by the defendants seeking a direction that the plaintiff be directed to supply copies of documents mentioned in the pleadings to the defendants. On 20.4.2009, counsel for the plaintiff requested for an adjournment to enable him to confirm about the death of the plaintiff. On 15.5.2009, an application was filed for bringing on record the legal representatives of the C.R. No. 7191 of 2010 2 plaintiff. The said application was allowed vide order dated 24.7.2009. Thereafter, the case was again adjourned for filing of the written statement by the defendants. Defendants filed their written statement on 10.11.2009 alongwith reply to the application moved by the plaintiff for striking off the defence. Vide the impugned order, the defence of the defendants had been struck off as the written statement was not filed within 90 days. Hence, the present petition by the defendants. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the written statement could not be filed within the stipulated time as earlier the petitioners had moved an application for supply of copies of documents mentioned in the pleadings. Thereafter, an application was moved for bringing on record the legal representatives of the plaintiff on account of death of the plaintiff. The delay in filing the written statement was not intentional but due to the said facts. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves to be allowed. In case the defendants are allowed to file their written statement, the dispute between the parties would be decided on merits. Moreover, the written statement has already been placed on record on 10.11.2009 alongwith reply to the application filed by the plaintiff seeking striking off defence of the defendants. In the present case, initially the defendants after appearance had moved an application for direction to the plaintiff to supply copies of the documents. Thereafter, due to the death of the plaintiff, his legal representatives were brought on record vide order C.R. No. 7191 of 2010 3 dated 24.7.2009. It would be in the interest of justice to allow the defendants to file their written statement. Moreover, the other side can be compensated with costs. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside and consequently the written statement filed by the defendants is ordered to be taken on record subject to payment of ` 5,000/- as costs. (SABINA) JUDGE January 17, 2011 Anand