( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3917 OF 2010 Sow. Gangubai w/o Dattarao Kshirsagar PETITIONER VERSUS Prabhakar s/o Sakharam Tejband & others RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. P.K. Deshmukh, advocate for the petitioner. ..... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 29th April, 2010] PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner is original plaintiff. The respondent did not file written statement in the suit (R.C.S. No. 19/2008), but lateron had applied for setting aside “No W.S.” order, passed against him on 25th April, 2008. The trial Court allowed the application subject to payment of 750/- as costs which was made payable on or prior to the next date scheduled in the suit. The respondent failed to deposit the amount of costs within the given period. He again applied vide Exh-56 for ( 2 ) extension of time on the ground that he could not deposit the amount due to ill-health of his son. The trial Court heard the parties and extended the time by imposing further cost of Rs. 1000/- more. That order dated 19th January, 2010 is being challenged by the petitioner (plaintiff). 3. Having heard learned counsel and on consideration of the impugned order, it is amply clear that the impugned order is passed in the exercise of discretion available to the trial Court under section 148 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The petitioner did not challenge the previous order whereby the trial Court allowed filing of the written statement by setting aside the “No W.S.” order. The subsequent extension of time on condition of making further payment of Rs. 1000/- is not an order which could be regarded as perverse. No substance. Petition is dismissed. [ V.R. KINGAONKAR ] JUDGE NPJ/wp3917-2010 ( 3 )