SUKHWINDER SINGH Vs. KHUSHI RAM JIWAN DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE order under challenge, defence of the petitioner was struck off for want of filing written-statement. Present revision petition has been filed after about 1- year of the passing of the said order. This clearly indicates that from the day one, intention of the petitioner was to delay the proceedings. No doubt, provisions of Order 8 Rule 1 CPC are directory in nature and not mandatory and written-statement can be taken on record beyond the period prescribed, but act of the petitioner is such that he is not entitled to any relief from this Court. Dismissed. February 23, 2006. ( Jasbir Singh ) DKC Judge Civil Revision No. 1065 of 2006 (O&M) Present: Mr. Jaswinder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner By referring to contents of the sale deed Ex. P1, counsel contends that the property going to be sold in execution of the decree against the judgment -debtor belongs to the partnership firm and not to the judgment-debtor in his individual capacity. It has further been stated that the judgment-debtor has sold his share in the partnership to one Chanan Singh in 1987, i.e., much prior to the passing of the decree, which is going to be executed. Notice of motion for March 31, 2006. In the meantime, if the amount, deposited by the petitioner, has not been disbursed to the decreeholder, the same be not disbursed till further orders. February 23, 2006. ( Jasbir Singh) DKC Judge F.A.O. No. 1075 of 2006 (O&M) Present: Mr. H.S. Saggu, Advocate, for the appellant. Notice of motion for May 15, 2006. In the meantime, parties are directed to maintain status quo regarding nature of the property in dispute till further orders. February 23, 2006. ( Jasbir Singh ) DKC Judge