← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCR/1562/2024disposed of

Shakuntala v. Vikash

2025-02-19Mr. Justice Suvir Sehgal2 pages

CR-1562-2024 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (119) CR-1562-2024 (O&M) Date of decision:- 19.02.2025 Shakuntala ... Petitioner

Versus

Vikash ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present:- Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal Opal, Advocate (THROUGH V.C.) and Ms. V. Vedika Rao, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.K.Tripathi, Advocate for the respondent.

**** SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

Short issue in the instant revision petition is as to whether the petitioner can be permitted to withdraw the civil suit with liberty to file a fresh one. 2.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed a suit, Annexure P-1, for possession with consequential relief of permanent injunction, but as the suit was defective, an application was moved for its withdrawal with liberty to file a fresh one. However, while accepting the application, vide impugned order dated 25.01.2023, Annexure P-3, the Trial Court has permitted the petitioner to withdraw the suit, but has declined to grant the liberty.

3.

Counsel for the respondent has resisted the petition by urging that the application for withdrawal is totally silent as to the defect in the suit. KAMAL SHARMA 2025.02.25 17:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Chandigarh.

CR-1562-2024 (O&M) -24.

I have heard counsel for the parties and considered their respective submissions.

5.

It is correct that in the application for withdrawal, Annexure P-3, petitioner has failed to point out the typographical error in the civil suit. However, counsel for the petitioner states that it is on account of nonimpleadment of necessary parties to the civil suit. Counsel asserts that suit has been filed for possession of the property, which belongs to petitioner's deceased father and her siblings and other legal representatives are necessary parties, but inadvertently they could not be impleaded. 6.

The non-impleadment of necessary parties is a formal defect and Trial Court should have granted liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh suit while accepting her application.

7.

Accordingly, impugned order dated 25.01.2023, Annexure P-3, is modified. While permitting the petitioner to withdraw the suit, she is granted liberty to file a fresh one after removing the technical defect. 8.

Petition is disposed off.

9.

Pending application also stands disposed off. (SUVIR SEHGAL) 19.02.2025 JUDGE Kamal Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No KAMAL SHARMA 2025.02.25 17:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Chandigarh.