CR No.1195 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH CR No.1195 of 2009 Date of decision March 4, 2009 Harbans Singh ....... Petitioner Versus Parmjit Kaur and others ........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present:- Mr. V.I.P. Sandhu, Advocate with Mr. I.P.S. Kohli, Advocate for the petitioner. **** 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? No K. Kannan, J (oral). 1. The order impugned before this Court in revision is an order of the Court below striking of defence for non-filing of written statement. While so doing the learned Judge has observed that the defendant had entered appearance on 31.10.2008 and he had not filed the written statement within one month. The petitioner was therefore, filed for receiving written statement and that was dismissed. The amended provisions of Civil Procedure allowed for 90 days time for filing a written statement. There is simply no reason to strike off the defence only because the written statement was not filed within thirty days. Discretion is to be exercised judiciously and if it is ever found that there is a deliberate delay which is caused by the defendant, the remedy shall be to visit the person causing such delay with costs. The dismissal of the application and striking of defence ill-behoves the cause of justice. The statement is CR No.1195 of 2009 2 ordered to be received and the Court shall take appropriate further proceeding on receiving a written statement. 2. The order is passed even at the stage of admission by dispensing with notice to the respondent to save time and to ensure speedier justice. 3. The Civil Revision is disposed of on the above terms. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE March 4, 2009 archana