=1= IN IN IN THE THE THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE APPELLATE APPELLATE JURISDICTION JURISDICTION JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.8922 OF 2007 NO.8922 OF 2007 NO.8922 OF 2007 Shri Parsottam Babu and anr. ...Petitioners v/s Ambalal B. Kamli and ors. ...Respondents Mr R.M. Haridas i/b Mr P.N. Joshi for Petitioners. Mr Nitesh Bhutekar i/b Mr Uday P. Warunjikar for Respondent Nos.1A to 1D, 3 to 6. Mr A.S. Pal for Respondent No.7. CORAM CORAM CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA J. : ANOOP V. MOHTA J. : ANOOP V. MOHTA J. DATE DATE DATE : 24TH NOVEMBER 2008 24TH NOVEMBER 2008 24TH NOVEMBER 2008 P.C.- 1. This is defendant Nos.1 and 2’ petition whose application to accept written statement on record was rejected as it was delayed by six months. In the suit, an order to proceed without written statement was passed on 21st July 2006 and this application was made on 24th January 2007. The defendant Nos.1 and 2 are necessary parties and their written statement is necessary to adjudicate the issues involved in the matter with regard =2= to the ownership of the property. Therefore in the interest of justice, I am inclined to grant this application. The impugned order is quashed and set aside, petition is allowed, however, it is subject to cost of Rs.3,000/- to be paid within three weeks from today by the defendant Nos.1 and 2 to the plaintiffs. ( ANOOP V. MOHTA J. )