Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Balwant Kaur vs M/S Vikas House Building Co. Pvt. Ltd. ... on 2 November, 2012

Author: T.P.S. Mann

Bench: T.P.S. Mann

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

                                Civil Revision 6490 of 2012(O&M)
                            Date of Decision : November 02, 2012

Balwant Kaur

                                                          ....Petitioner

                                Versus

M/s Vikas House Building Co. Pvt. Ltd. and others

                                                     .....Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN

Present :    Mr. Sourabh Goel, Advocate

T.P.S. MANN, J.(Oral)

The plaintiff has filed the present revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for challenging the order dated 8.6.2012 passed by the trial Court and also for striking off the defence of defendants No.1 and 2 on account of non filing of their written statement within the time permitted by the Code of Civil Procedure.

Vide impugned order, the trial Court rejected the application filed by the plaintiff under Order VIII Rule 1 read with Rule 10 and Section 151 CPC, which had been filed by the plaintiff for striking off the defence of defendants No.1 and 2.

It is true that the written statement had not been filed within the time stipulated by the Code of Civil Procedure. However, as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the CR 6490 of 2012(O&M) -2- case of Salem Advocate Bar Association, Tamil Nadu V. Union of India 2005(3) RCR (Civil) 530, provisions of Order VIII Rule 1 CPC are directory in nature. Moreover, the written statement is already available on the judicial file though it was placed on record subsequent to the filing of the application under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC. The defendants had also explained the reasons as to why they had taken inordinately long in filing their written statement.

In view of the above, there is no merit in the present revision which is, accordingly, dismissed.





                                                ( T.P.S. MANN )
November 02, 2012                                    JUDGE
ajay-1