1 lpa 59.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 59 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 5835 OF 2009 Afzal S/o Budhan .. Appellant Versus Kaduba S/o Mahadu Palkar .. Respondent Shri A. P. Bhandari, Advocate for the Appellant. Shri D. P. Palodkar, Advocate for the Respondent. CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE & S. S. SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 14TH MARCH, 2011. PER COURT : . The letters patent appeal has been preferred against the order of the learned Single Judge allowing the writ petition. That writ petition was filed against the order passed by the Trial Court accepting the written statement of the appellant on record. We have perused a copy of the impugned order. The learned advocate for the appellant has tried to make out a case that 2 lpa 59.11 appellant has been caused substantial loss by not accepting written statement. 2. We have perused the roznama of the Trial Court and we find that several adjournments have been sought for filing the written statement, after the order of "No W.S." has been passed. Even thereafter, the appellant did not file any application for a period of 3 years for setting aside the order of "No W.S.". With these circumstances, we see no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge. The letters patent appeal is dismissed. [ S. S. SHINDE, J. ] [ SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.] bsb/March 11