IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 463 of 1997 DATE OF DECISION : 24.02.2010 Narain Dass .... PETITIONER Versus Parbandhak Committee Thakurdawara Lal Ji Dass (Regd.), Raikot and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. T.P.S. Chawla, Advocate, for the petitioner. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral ) The petitioner, who is defendant in a suit filed under Section 92 CPC with regard to the temple known as Thakurdawara Lal Ji Dass, Bazar Saincharan, Raikot, District Ludhiana, has filed this petition against the order dated 4.12.1996, passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jagraon. According to the respondents-plaintiffs, petitioner-defendant is the Mohtmim of the said temple. They filed the suit with an application to grant them leave to file suit on behalf of the temple. After notice to the petitioner-defendant, vide order dated 21.1.1995, the said application was allowed and permission was granted to the respondents-plaintiffs to institute the suit against the petitioner-defendant for mis-management/mis- appropriation of the property of the temple. Instead of challenging the said order, the petitioner-defendant moved an application before the trial court CR No. 463 of 1997 -2- for passing a speaking order, as according to the petitioner-defendant, the order dated 21.1.1995 was passed by the trial, without noticing the arguments raised by his counsel and without recording the reasons for grant of leave to the respondents-plaintiffs to institute the suit. The said application was dismissed by the trial court vide order dated 4.12.1996, which has been impugned in the instant petition. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner-defendant, when this Court is not inclined to accept this petition, learned counsel states that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the revision petition with liberty to raise the issue of maintainability of the suit as well as the bonafide of the respondents-plaintiffs to institute the suit, before the trial court. Dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. It is made clear that if the written statement has already been filed by the petitioner- defendant, then it will be open for him to amend the written statement. February 24, 2010 ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) ndj JUDGE