1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.780 OF 2009 WITH C.A.NO.976 OF 2009 Zoharabaiu Munir Shaikh. ..Appellant. Vs. Babu Miya Attar. ..Respondent. Mr. G.V.Pandya for the Appellant. CORAM : R.S. MOHITE, J. DATE : 12TH AUGUST, 2009 PC : 1. This is an appeal filed by the original plaintiff against an order dated 12.11.2008 dismissing a notice of motion filed by her. The facts of the case are that the plaintiff filed a suit in the year 2005 and served the writ of summons to answer the plaint on the defendant on 24.10.2005. 90-days for filing the written statement expired on 24.12.2005. It however, appears that the written statement was not filed in time and the application was moved on 13.3.2006 for 2 condoning delay and taking written statement on record on the same day. The plaintiff then moved Motion No. 907 of 2007 for setting aside the order dated 13.3.2006 on the footing that the advocate has not followed the proper procedure and obtained orders behind the back of the plaintiff. The defendant thereafter moved the present notice of motion and after serving the plaintiff the matter was moved for order. This time the defendant followed the proper procedure. In his affidavit in support, he contended that he was not well and was suffering from hyper tension and high blood pressure .This fact was supported by Doctor certificate. The court has allowed his notice of motion after observing that he has prima facie case on merits and has shown sufficient ground. It is seen that the defendant has been trying to get his written statement on record from 13.3.2006 at which point of time there was a much lesser delay. The reasoning given by the trial court in accepting the reasons given for condoing delay, in my view, in 3 the interest of justice, need not be interfered with as the same cannot be said to be perverse. Hence, appeal dismissed. 2. In view of the above order, civil application does not survive and the same is disposed off. (R.S. MOHITE, J.)