Civil Revision No. 2296 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 2296 of 2010 Date of decision: 06.04.2010 The Indri Primary Agriculture & Land Development Bank, Indri .....Petitioner Versus Jasmer Singh and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K.SHARMA Present:- Mr. H.N. Sahu, Advocate, for the petitioner. VINOD K.SHARMA, J. (ORAL) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 26.11.2009, passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Karnal, vide which the defence of the petitioner was ordered to be struck off by not permitting it to file the written statement as period of 90 days had elapsed from the date of appearance. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the learned trial Court has wrongly taken provisions of Order 8 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure to be mandatory in nature, though these are merely directory and, therefore, a sufficient cause being shown, the Court could have granted one opportunity for filing of the written statement. The impugned order reads as under: - “Written statement on behalf of defendant No.1 has been filed. Copy supplied. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of defendant No.1 in terms of his statement recorded separately has stated that he does not want to file a separate reply to the interim stay application. In this respect written statement be read as reply to the application. Civil Revision No. 2296 of 2010 -2- Written statement on behalf of defendant No.2 has not been filed, despite the fact that it was the last opportunity. No good ground for further adjourning the matter for filing written statement by defendant no.2 is made out. In this case defendant no.2 appeared through counsel for the first time on 6.8.2009 and a period of 90 days has also elapsed. Defendant no.2 has now precluded for filing any written statement. Now to come up on 14.1.2010 for arguments on stay application. Interim order continue in the mean time.” Learned counsel for the petitioners does not challenge the impugned order on merits and prays that in the interest of justice, the petitioner may be granted one last opportunity to file the written statement, subject to payment of costs. In view of the stand taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner and without going into the merits of the case, this Court feels that interest of justice would be served, if the petitioner is granted one last opportunity to file the written statement on the date fixed i.e. 17.4.2010. “Ordered accordingly.” In case, the written statement is filed on the date fixed, the same be taken on record and the Court thereafter can proceed in accordance with law. However, this shall be subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) as costs. (Vinod K. Sharma) Judge April 06, 2010 R.S.