IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Revision No. 745 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 3.2.2010 Smt. Asha and others ...Petitioners Versus Smt. Nirmal Tayal and others ...Respondents CORAM : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present:- Mr. S.P. Chahar and Mr. Gaurav Hooda, Advocates for petitioners. RAJESH BINDAL, J Challenge in the present petition is to the orders dated 20.1.2009 and 22.7.2009 passed by the learned Court below. Vide order dated 20.1.2009 the evidence of the petitioners/defendants was struck off on account of non- filling of written statement within time permitted. Vide subsequent order dated 22.7.2009 the application filed by the petitioners for setting aside earlier order passed on 20.1.2009 striking off the defence of the petitioners, was also dismissed on account of absence of counsel for the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is default in non-filiing of written statement within the time permitted, however, on that account the proceedings in the suit have not been delayed as service of all the defendants in the suit is yet to be completed and issues are yet to be framed. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, I do not find justification to grant any opportunity to the petitioners to file their written statement. It is a suit which was filed way back on 8.9.1998. Admittedly the petitioners were impleaded as defendants on 18.8.2008 and they appeared in Court for the first time on 1.9.2008. The defence was struck off on 20.1. 2009 on account of non-filing of written statement. No provision of law could be referred to under which the application was filed before the learned Court below for setting aside the order earlier passed on 20.1.2009. However, still even that application was dismissed on 22.7.2009 on account of absence of counsel for the petitioners in the Court below, the order is sought to be challenged in the present petition, which was filed on February 2, 2010 in this Court. Considering the conduct of the petitioners, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned orders. The present petition is accordingly dismissed. (RAJESH BINDAL) 3.2.2010 JUDGE Reema