1 Ash IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 913 OF 2010 J.S. Solomon. .. Petitioner Vs Rajesh Construction & Ors. .. Respondents -- Shri Anant N. Samant for the Petitioner. -- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 26TH APRIL, 2010 P.C: . On 9th February, 2010, notice for final disposal has been issued by this Court. The office remark shows that Respondent No.1 is served with the notice and the other Respondents have been served with private notice. The 1st Respondent is the original Plaintiff who appears to be the main contesting party who has been served with a notice. 2. Under the order dated 6th March, 2009 passed by the Apex Court, a direction was issued for appointment of an Administrator of the assets of a Company by the name of Tulsidas V. Patel Private Limited ( 2nd Respondent - 1st Defendant ). On the basis of the order of the Apex Court the present Petitioner has been appointed as the Administrator by this Court 2 by its orders dated 6th and 17th April, 2009. On the basis of the appointment of the Petitioner as the Administrator, a Chamber Summons was taken out by the Applicant for impleading him as a party Defendant. By the impugned order dated 14th December, 2009, the chamber summons has been made partly absolute by which the Petitioner has been directed to be impleaded as a party defendant No.3. However, while passing the impugned order, the learned Judge has observed that the Petitioner will not be permitted to file a Written Statement. The challenge by the Petitioner in this Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to that part of the impugned order by which he has been denied an opportunity of filing written statement. 3. After having heard the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, I find that the approach of the Trial Court is erroneous. In terms of the order of the Apex Court, the Petitioner has been appointed as the Administrator of the 1st Defendant - 2nd Respondent. By the impugned order, the Petitioner has been directed to be impleaded as the party Defendant No.3. The said order has not been challenged by the 1st Respondent. The Administrator in his capacity as 3rd Defendant is entitled to file written statement. It is obvious that while filing the written statement, he can raise such defences and such contentions which are consistent with his capacity as the Administrator who has been appointed to protect the property and interests of the 2nd Defendant. To that extent, modification will have to be made to the impugned order. 3 4. Hence, I passed the following order. (a) The impugned order is modified. The Petitioner is permitted to file a Written Statement. (b) It is made clear that in the Written Statement, the Petitioner can raise such defences and such contentions which are consistent with his status as the Administrator. (c) The Written Statement shall be filed within a period of eight weeks from today. (d) All contentions of the parties on merits of the suit are kept open. (e) The Writ Petition is allowed in above terms with no orders as to costs. (A.S.OKA, J)