C.R. No. 448 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 448 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 21.1.2011 Smt. Sawaran Kaur ......Petitioner Versus Manjit Singh Grewal & others .......Respondents ******* CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present : Mr. Gauravjeet Singh, Advocate for Mr. G.S. Nagpal, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** SABINA, J. Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 23.12.2010, passed by Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalandhar, vide which defence of the petitioner was struck off. Plaintiff had initially filed a suit for permanent injunction and later on the suit was amended and plaintiff claimed possession of the suit property by way of specific performance of agreement to sell dated 30.9.2005. Vide the impugned order, the defence of the petitioner has been struck off on the ground that the written statement had not been filed within 90 days of passing of the order of amendment of plaint. Hence, the present petition. C.R. No. 448 of 2011 (O&M) 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after the amendment of the suit the requisite court fee was paid by the plaintiff on 7.12.2010. Hence, the petitioner was required to file the written statement from the said date. The application seeking amendment of the plaint was allowed vide order dated 8.9.2010 subject to payment of ` 1,000/- as costs. The case was adjourned for filing of court fee by the plaintiff to 21.9.2010. The case was adjourned to 7.12.2010 as the Presiding Officer was on leave on 21.9.2010. On 7.12.2010 following order was passed (as reproduced in para 3 of the petition) :- “Cost paid. Deficiency of court fee made good by plaintiff. Written statement not filed by defendants. Same be filed on 15.12.2010.” Since the costs were paid on 7.12.2010 in pursuance of the order dated 8.9.2010 and the deficiency in court fee was also made good on the said date. In case the petitioner had failed to make up the deficiency in court fee or pay costs, the suit of the petitioner was liable to be dismissed. Thus, the time period for the defendants to file written statement was to begin w.e.f. 7.12.2010. The learned trial Court has proceeded in haste while passing the impugned order. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 23.12.2010 is set aside. (SABINA) JUDGE January 21, 2011 Anand