AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
D.V. Sehgal, J.—This revision petition is directed against the order, dated May 20, 1988, passed by the learned Sub Judge 1st Class, Chandigarh, whereby the defence of the Defendant-Petitioner-Union of India, has been struck off
The Plaintiff Respondent filed a suit against the Petitioner through the General Manager. Northern Railway, New Delhi, for the refund of the amount of over-charging on as many as 299 items of consignment which were mentioned in the Annexure appended with the plaint A copy of the plaint was served on the Petitioner but it was not accompanied by a copy of the annexure giving the details of these consignment. The first date fixed in the case was 25th February, 1986. On that date, the Presiding Officer was on leave and the case was adjourned to 16th March, 1988. It was after that date that a copy of the annexure was supplied to the counsel for the Petitioner No doubt, thereafter the matter was adjourned four times and ultimately, on 20th May, 1988, when the written statement was not filed, the defence of the Petitioner was struck off vide the impugned order.
The learned Counsel for the Petitioner contends that the information which was to be collected by the Petitioner before the written statement could be filed was enormous in magnitude. The item of consignment involved were 299 in number. Information was to be collected from the different Railway Booking Stations. It was to be complied by the Claim Office and then furnished to the counsel for preparing the written statement It is on that account that abnormally long time was taken in preparing the written statement which could not be filed on 20th May, 1988. I find that the cause for delay has been amply explained it would work injustice to the Petitioner if its defence is struck off particularly when the claim in suit is to the tune of Rs. 3,88,671, besides interest. It would be just and fair in the circumstances to allow yet another opportunity to it to file its written statement
Consequently, this revision petition is allowed without any order as to costs and the order of the trial Court, dated May 20, 1988, is set aside. The Defendant-Petitioner shall now be allowed to file its written statement subject to payment of Rs. 500/- as costs.
The parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the learned trial Court on 5th December, 1988, when the Petitioner shall be allowed to file its written statement and further proceedings in accordance with law shall be taken. In case, the written statement is not filed on the date fixed i.e. December 5, 1988, no further opportunity shall be granted to file the same.