IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.2954 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision : 5.5.2010 Balwinder Singh ....Petitioner Versus Bhoj Raj ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr. Deepak Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. C.M.No.11498-CII of 2010 Allowed as prayed for. C.R.No.2954 of 2010 Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he had filed an application for leave to defend the suit and he is not willing to accept the concession given by the respondent wherein he has stated that he has no objection if the application seeking leave to defend the suit is granted in favour of the petitioner subject to his furnishing surety. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has never consented to this order and wanted to raise some arguable points. He contends that this order be set aside and he be permitted to raise the points which he has made in the application seeking leave to defend the suit. C.R.No.2954 of 2010 (O&M) -2- After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and keeping in view the fact that he is not interested in availing the benefit of the concession given by the respondent, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition without issuance of notice of motion to the other side as no prejudice would be caused to the respondent in such an eventuality. It is the petitioner who is willing to deny the benefit of the statement of the counsel for the respondent and the consequent order passed by the trial Court by insisting on the application for leave to defend to be decided on merits. For the aforesaid reasons the present petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The trial Court shall proceed with the decision of the application for leave to defend the suit on the grounds mentioned therein and dispose of the same in accordance with law. 5.5.2010 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss