1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 1809 OF 2010. Janardhan Vishwanath Patil -: versus :- Padmavati Vishwanath Patil and others. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : APRIL 22, 2010. Heard Shri M.M. Agnihotri, learned counsel for petitioner. The petitioner though served with the summons of Special Civil Suit No.51/2004 did not engage Advocate and also did not take any steps to file Written Statement. On 24.02.2010 he moved an application for recall of the order of ‘no W.S.’ and for permission to place it on record. The application was opposed. The trial Court has considered the reasons disclosed and found that no exceptional circumstances or sufficient ground was made out. Paragraph no.8 of the impugned order shows consideration of all these aspects. Petitioner who claimed to be of disturbed mental condition, did not produce any document on record and as such the trial Court has after detailed discussion and findings given by it rejected the application. Even before this Court in Writ Petition the same stand is reiterated with additional 2 contention that no prejudice will be caused to other side if the Written Statement is taken on record. I do not find any perversity or jurisdictional error in the order. Writ petition is thus dismissed. However, petitioner is at liberty to challenge the impugned order dated 26 02.2010 after final disposal of the suit, if contingency therefor arises. No cost. JUDGE Rgd.