(1) S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2613/2009-Jaswant Singh vs. Baljeet Singh & Anr.,(2) S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2614/2009-Jaswant Singh vs. Smt. Jasveer Kaur & Anr.,(3) S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2615/2009-Jaswant Singh vs. Shubhdeep Kaur, (4) S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2616/2009-Jaswant Singh vs. Sukhdev Singh & Anr. Order dt : 7/7/2009 - 1 - S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2613/2009 (Jaswant Singh vs. Baljeet Singh & Anr.) S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2614/2009 (Jaswant Singh vs. Smt. Jasveer Kaur & Anr.) S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2615/2009 (Jaswant Singh vs. Shubhdeep Kaur) S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2616/2009 (Jaswant Singh vs. Sukhdev Singh & Anr.) DATE OF ORDER : 7/7/2009 HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr.R.K.Thanvi, for the petitioner. Mr.Rajendra Charan, for the respondents. These writ petitions are directed against the order dated 17/2/2009, whereby, the applications under Order 9 Rule 7 CPC were rejected by the learned trial court which were filed to set aside the ex- parte proceedings drawn against the defendant. Learned counsel for the defendant submitted that the suit itself was filed on 21/4/2008 and was registered after removal of defects on 30/6/2008 and the summons were served by publication on an application filed by the plaintiff under Order 5 Rule 20 CPC. On 16/12/2008 the defendant engaged lawyer to defend his case in the (1) S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2613/2009-Jaswant Singh vs. Baljeet Singh & Anr.,(2) S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2614/2009-Jaswant Singh vs. Smt. Jasveer Kaur & Anr.,(3) S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2615/2009-Jaswant Singh vs. Shubhdeep Kaur, (4) S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2616/2009-Jaswant Singh vs. Sukhdev Singh & Anr. Order dt : 7/7/2009 - 2 - Court, however, even copy of the plaint was not served upon the defendant and, therefore, written statement could not be filed. On 16/12/2008 itself the trial court proceeded ex-parte against the defendant and present application was filed by the defendant on 22/12/2008 explaining that on 16/12/2008 on account of elections of bar association the advocate could not attend the proceedings before the Court and ex-parte proceedings were drawn. Learned counsel for the plaintiff however opposes these writ petitions and submits that the reason assigned by the learned trial court is proper that there was no justification for lawyers strike or abstaining from work on account of elections of bar association and, therefore, the ex-parte proceedings were rightly drawn against the defendant. Having heard learned counsels and upon perusal of the reason given by the learned trial court, though this Court is satisfied that the reason assigned by the learned trial court cannot be faulted with and it was expected of the lawyer concerned to attend the proceedings of (1) S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2613/2009-Jaswant Singh vs. Baljeet Singh & Anr.,(2) S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2614/2009-Jaswant Singh vs. Smt. Jasveer Kaur & Anr.,(3) S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2615/2009-Jaswant Singh vs. Shubhdeep Kaur, (4) S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2616/2009-Jaswant Singh vs. Sukhdev Singh & Anr. Order dt : 7/7/2009 - 3 - the suit on the given date notwithstanding the elections of the bar association and which was no good reason, yet in the interest of justice and in view of the fact that the suit itself was filed on 21/4/2008 and the defendant took proper steps in appropriate manner to defend the suit, for the fault of the advocate the defendant cannot be permitted to suffer to this extent. Therefore, treating it as peculiar cases, these writ petitions are disposed of and the impugned order dated 17/2/2009 in each writ petition is set aside. Copy of the plaint may be supplied to the defendant forthwith and written statement if filed within one month thereafter may be taken on record. However, the defendant petitioner shall pay cost of Rs.1000/- in each case to the plaintiff. Subject to aforesaid observations, these petitions are disposed of. (DR.VINEET KOTHARI), J. item no.3-6 baweja/-