KBP 2625-09.sxw 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2625 OF 2009 Abbasbhai Khanbhai Chitalwala and anr. ..Petitioners Vs. Mumbai Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai and ors. ..Respondents ......... Mr.Ali Aamel Zaidy and T.A.Zaidy i/b.M/s.Zaidy and co., for petitioners. Mr.M.M.Malvankar, for respondent – B.M.C. ......... CORAM : A.S.OKA, J.. DATE : 10 th August, 2009. P.C. : 1] By this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have impugned the order dated 5 th November, 2008 passed by the trial court by which earlier ex-parte order passed against the first respondent Municipal Corporation in a suit filed by the petitioners has been set aside and the written statement filed by the first respondent Municipal Corporation has been permitted to be taken on record. 2] Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has place reliance on a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Mohammed Yusuf Vs. Faij Mohammad and ors. [2009 (2) All M.R. 486]. He submits that a gross illegality has been committed by the trial court by permitting the written statement to be filed after lapse of five years and six months. 3] By filing this writ petition, the petitioners have invoked extra ordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is the power of KBP 2625-09.sxw 2 superintendence. In exercise of said power it is not necessary to interfere with every order merely because it is wring. Effect of the impugned order is that the first respondent Municipal Corporation is permitted to defend the suit filed by the present petitioners. This is not a fit case to interfere in the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Petition is rejected. ( A.S.OKA, J. )