STATE OF H.P. Vs. KEWAL KRISHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against the order dated 10.6.2013 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) -II, Dharamshala in Civil Suit No. 60/2012.

(2.) PERTINENT facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that respondent -plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the "plaintiff" for convenience sake) has filed a Civil Suit No. 60/2012 before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) -II, Dharamshala for declaration. It is evident from the record that petitioner -defendant (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant" for convenience sake) has not filed the written statement. Defendant filed an application under section 148 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It was allowed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division). The case was fixed for 10.6.2013 for filing written statement. It is evident from order dated 10.6.2013 that written statement was not filed despite the defendant had put in appearance on 30.5.2012. Defendant had been seeking adjournments on different grounds. Defendant had been granted sufficient opportunities to file the written statement. It is in these circumstances, learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) has rightly struck off defence of defendant.

(3.) THEIR Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court have reiterated the principles laid down in : AIR 2005 SC 2441 in Sandeep Thapar vs. SME Technologies Private Limited, : (2014) 2 SCC 302 as under: