SATISH KUMAR SAINI Vs. JASBIR KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent No. 1 has filed a suit for declaration to the effect that she is owner of the suit property to the extent of 63.7% and defendant No. 2 -petitioner is the owner to the extent of 36.3 %. Vide order dtd. 9/2/2017, the defence of defendant No. 2-petitioner was struck off. He sought review of the said order, which has also been dismissed vide order dtd. 25/2/2020. Thus, the present revision petition has been filed.

(2.) A few relevant facts may be noticed. The petitioner put in appearance in the suit on 2/4/2014 and on the same day filed an applicaiton under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint. The said application was rejected by the trial Court vide order dtd. 11/11/2016. This order was challenged before the High Court by way of a civil revison petition in which proceedings before the trial Court were stayed vide order dtd. 24/4/2017. The revision petition was, however, ultimately dismised vide order dtd. 21/5/2019. Meanwhile, before proceedings were stayed by this Court, defence had been struck off vide order dtd. 9/2/2017.

(3.) From the above, it is evident that defendant No. 2-petitioner put in appearance on 2/4/2014 and has not filed the written statement till date. Defence was struck off vide order dtd. 9/2/2017 and by then a period of 34 months had elapsed, since the date he had put in appearance.