SANTOKH SINGH Vs. JAGIRI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant has approached this court challenging the order dated 22.8.2006, passed by the learned court below, whereby on account of non-filing of written statement within the time permitted, his defence was struck off.

(2.) Briefly, the facts of the case are that the respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance of agreement to sell dated 23.7.2005. In the aforesaid suit, after service of notice, the petitioner-defendant appeared and sought time to file reply. The same having not been filed, his defence was struck off vide impugned order.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after the petitioner-defendant was served in the suit, he had put in appearance on 16.3.2006. Due to wrong noting of date as 23.8.2006 instead of 22.8.2006, the written statement could not be filed and the defence was struck off. Explaining the delay in filing the petition in this court, he submitted that counsel in the court below under misconception filed application for setting aside ex-parte proceedings against the petitioner-defendant instead of filing appropriate application either for re-calling of order dated 22.8.2006 or for permission to file written statement. The same was dismissed on 27.2.2007. The order was challenged before this court in Civil Revision No. 2782 of 2007, where the same was withdrawn with liberty to file appropriate application before the court below, vide order dated 22.5.2007. The application for re-calling of order dated 22.8.2006 filed thereafter was dismissed as not maintainable vide order dated 2.12.2009. In fact, the petitioner has been misguided at every stage and on that account, he is suffering. He has only one house, which is subjectmatter of dispute. He further submitted that despite the defence of the petitioner having been struck off on 22.8.2006, the respondent-plaintiff has not led any evidence till date and the suit is still at the stage of PWs. No one has appeared for the respondent despite service. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the paper book.