DALIP SUNGH,J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) By the impugned order, the plaintiff's application filed before the learned trial court to strike out the defence of the defendant for not having filed the written statement within the prescribed period of ninety days was allowed.
(3.) The petitioner has challenged the aforesaid order in this writ petition. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that while it is true that the written statement was required to be filed within 90 days, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, there was a delay of only ten days inasmuch as on 28.09.2005 an order for proceeding ex-parte was passed against the defendant-petitioner as he failed to appear before the court on the date fixed. The ex-parte order was set aside vide order dated 21.03.2006 and the time was allowed to the petitioner to file the written statement on 24.04.2006 and the written statement was filed on 19.05.2006. Thus, in all it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, that 100 days were consumed by the defendant petitioner in filing the written statement as against 90 days which is prescribed under the statute. It is, thus, contended that there is a delay of only ten day in submitting the written statement.;