1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7034 OF 2009 Pune Polytronics Pvt. Ltd. .. Petitioner Vs Prime Technologies. .. Respondent -- Shri R.M. Pethe for the Petitioner. Shri Sanskar Marathe along with Shri Ajay Shinde for the Respondent. -- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATED : 5TH JANUARY, 2010 P. C. On 22nd September, 2009, notice for final disposal was issued by this Court. The Petitioner was directed to deposit the costs of Rs.7,500/- which amount has been deposited. The Petitioner is the original defendant and the Respondent is the original Plaintiff. There was a delay in filing Written Statement. An application was made by the Petitioner for taking the written statement on record. By the impugned order, the said application has been rejected. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submitted that the reasons were set out in the Application at Exhibit - 14 for delay in filing written statement. In the said application, it is pointed out that the trial Court had not passed an order for proceeding with the suit without written statement. He submitted that the application ought to have allowed. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the Respondent opposed the Petition. He pointed out that no exceptional circumstances or reasons have 2 been set out by the Petitioner for not filing written statement within the stipulated time. He submitted that as the exceptional circumstances or reasons have not been set out, the trial Court was justified in rejecting the application. 4. I have considered the submissions. The suit summons was served on 24th May, 2008. According to the case of the Respondent, time prescribed by law expired on 6th November, 2008. The Application Exhibit - 14 has been made on 22nd January, 2009. In the application, it is stated that monetary claim of the Respondent is based on certain documents and, therefore, it was necessary for the Petitioner to collect necessary documents for the purposes of drafting written statement. It is stated that for collection of necessary documents, it took some time. In the Application Exhibit - 14, it is stated that the trial Court has not passed any order directing that the suit will proceed without written statement. 5. The application was filed by the Petitioner within few days after expiry of the stipulated period provided for filing written statement. Reasons were set out for not filing written statement. The reason being that necessary documents were not available. Written statement could not have been filed without the documents. 6. Whether exceptional circumstances or exceptional reasons exist or not, always depends upon the facts and circumstances of a case. While passing the order below application Exhibit - 14, the trial Judge has 3 committed an error by holding that there was no exceptional circumstance in existence to extend the time for filing the written statement. The trial Judge ought to have allowed the application. The Petitioner has already deposited the sum of Rs.7,500/- towards the costs in this Petition payable to the Respondent. 7. Hence, I pass the following order. (a) The impugned order dated 1st July, 2009 is quashed and set aside. The Application at Exhibit - 14 is allowed. (b) It will be open for the Respondent to withdraw the said amount of costs of Rs.7,500/- deposited by the Petitioner in this Court. JUDGE