ZORA SINGH Vs. SUKHMINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is directed against the order dtd. 25/9/2018 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Payal (for short & the Trial Court) striking off the petitioner's defence for the reason that the petitioner had not filed his written statement during the prescribed period of 90 days from the date he had put in appearance.

(2.) The facts, in brief, which are required to be noticed for adjudicating upon the present petition are that the respondent filed a suit seeking therein to recover from the petitioner a sum of Rs.10,20,000.00 alongwith future interest and also to restrain him from alienating/transferring the property detailed and described in the head note of the plaint (for short and the suit property). He had further sought to declare agreement to sell dtd. 18/2/2017 as null and void. On being put to notice, the petitioner appeared before the Trial Court on 11/5/2017 but thereafter, since he did not appear on the subsequent date i.e. 3/8/2017, he was ordered to be proceeded ex parte. Thereafter, on 26/10/2017, the petitioner again appeared before the Trial Court and filed an application under Order 9 Rule 7 CPC seeking setting aside of the aforesaid ex parte order dtd. 3/8/2017 which was allowed by the Trial Court on 19/12/2017. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned thrice to enable the petitioner to file his written statement but he did not do so. On 21/3/2018, the petitioner filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC seeking rejection of the respondent's plaint. Such application was dismissed by the Trial Court on 1/8/2018. Even thereafter, the matter was adjourned twice for the petitioner to file his written statement. However, he did not do so. He also did not deposit the awarded costs. Resultantly, through order dtd. 25/9/2018, the petitioner's defence was struck off. Such order is under challenge in the present proceedings.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is suffering from heart and pulmonary ailments and for this reason as also because he was pursuing his legal remedies he could not file his written statement in time. It is submitted that there is some delay on the part of the petitioner in filing his written statement but for that the extreme and harsh step of striking off his defence should have not been taken by the Trial Court.