1 13 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4433/2004. Navneet Kumar & Anr. Vs. A.D.J. No.1, Bhilwara & Ors. Date of Order :: 20th March 2009. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Dr. Sachin Acharya, for the petitioners. Mr. Arun Bhansali ] Ms. Shama Bano for Mr. Pradeep Shah ], for the respondents. ..... BY THE COURT: In the civil suit as filed by the respondent No.2 Subhash Chandra seeking declaration, dissolution of partnership, partition and perpetual injunction, the petitioners-defendants did not file written statement within time and were proceeded ex parte. An application as moved on behalf of the petitioners under Order IX Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure came to be rejected by the order dated 02.09.2004 (Annex. 8); and questioning the said order dated 02.09.2004, the petitioners have preferred this writ petition. This petition was considered on 11.10.2004 and, while issuing notices returnable within 10 days, this Court ordered that if the petitioners would deposit an amount of Rs. 5,000/- towards costs and would also submit written statement on the date already fixed in the Trial Court, the Trial court would proceed with the matter while taking the written statement on record; and upon the plaintiff raising any objection in adopting such a procedure, further proceedings in the suit were to remain stayed. 2 However, the fact remains that the petitioners did not deposit the requisite amount of costs nor filed the written statement. This fact situation was noticed by this Court on 15.09.2005 and finding the written statement having not been filed, the Trial Court was left free to proceed with the trial; and was directed to proceed expeditiously. It is now pointed out that the suit has registered substantial progress and is fixed for final arguments. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners could not comply with the requirements of the order dated 11.10.2004 due to ailment of the petitioner No.2, the mother of the petitioner No.1 but then, further submitted that looking to the overall circumstances of the case, the passage of time, and the proceedings already undertaken, the petitioners shall stand advised not to proceed with this writ petition any further and, therefore, seeks permission to withdraw with liberty for the petitioners to question the said order dated 02.09.2004 in appropriate proceedings particularly in appeal, if so required and if so advised. Learned counsel Mr. Arun Bhansali appearing for the respondent-plaintiff, in all fairness, has not put a serious opposition to such submissions as made on behalf of the petitioners. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners are permitted to withdraw; and the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed. No costs. 3 (DINESH MAHESHWARI), J. Mohan/