1 8 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7637/2007. Nagar Palika, Sardarshahar Vs. Civil Judge (J.D.), Sardarshahar & Ors. Date of Order :: 30th January 2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Mr. S.P. Sharma, for the petitioner. Mr. B.K. Bhatnagar, for the respondents. ..... BY THE COURT: By way of this petition for writ, the petitioner-defendant has put a challenge to the order dated 03.11.2007 (Annex.1) whereby the trial court has proceeded to grant permission to the plaintiffs in the suit pending before it to file replication in relation to some of the pleas taken in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 11 of the written statement. It is essentially contended by learned counsel Mr. S.P. Sharma in challenge to the order aforesaid that the learned trial court has acted wholly illegally in permitting filing of such replication merely on an application moved by the plaintiff that was not accompanied by the proposed pleadings in whose absence there was no occasion for the learned trial court to arrive at the conclusion as to whether filing of any pleadings after the written statement was to be permitted or not ? Learned counsel Mr.B.K. Bhatnagar appearing for the plaintiffs 2 admits the fact that the proposed replication was not filed along with the application before the trial court but submits that after passing of the order impugned, the plaintiffs have put such further pleadings on record on 23.11.2007, the date fixed by the learned trial court for the purpose. The order as made by the learned trial court allowing application under Order 8 Rule 9 CPC without having on record the proposed pleadings cannot be sustained but in the circumstances of the case and for the reason that such further pleadings have now been placed on record, it appears appropriate that the application so moved by the plaintiffs be restored for re-consideration by the learned trial court with reference to the pleadings so filed treating them to be the proposed pleadings. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above, while the impugned order dated 03.11.2007 (Annex.1) is set aside, the application as moved by the plaintiffs under Order 8 Rule 9 CPC stands restored for re-consideration by the learned trial court treating the pleadings so filed by the plaintiffs as proposed pleadings. There shall be no orders as to costs of this writ petition. (DINESH MAHESHWARI), J. Mohan/