ssm sm sm IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 4159 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 4159 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 4159 OF 2008 Mr.Madhukar Gianu Banker & Ors. ...Petitioners. Vs. Mr.Chandrakant Shivaji Dhavale ...Respondents. Mr.Rajesh More for the Petitioners. Mr.A.R.Kapadnis for the Respondents. CORAM CORAM CORAM : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. DATED DATED DATED : 14th October, 2008. : 14th October, 2008. : 14th October, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. . The Petitioner has challenged the order of rejection of his Application to set aside no W.S. order dated 15/07/2006. Admittedly, an application was filed to set aside the said order dated 20th September, 2006 to which say was given by the Plaintiff sometime in February, 2008. Thereof, the Court has rejected the said Application mainly on the ground that more than 15 months have been passed and there is no sufficient reason given not to grant such Application. This Application dated 20/09/2006 admittedly filed by the advocate. There is no affidavit and details given to support the said Application as noted in the order while rejecting the ( 2 ) Application, Court has observed as under:- "2. The counsel of the defendants during argument submitted that the defendants are residing at Mumbai. Defendant No.2 was ill and moreover, the defendants left their house after bomb blast in Mumbai in the year 2005 and so, the counsel of the defendants could not contact them. So, they could not file written statement within time prescribed under Order 8 Rule 1. The defendant has to file written statement within 90 days. If in exceptional circumstance, it appears to the Court that due to some unavoidable circumstance, the defendant could not file written statement within time, then, the Court will permit the defendant to file written statement after 90 days." 2. The submission, that there is no material available at that time and in view of the fact that all the Petitioners are basically resident of Bombay, therefore, unable to provide details. Some of the medical certificates are the part of this record also. ( 3 ) In view of this, in the interest of justice and to give full opportunity to the Petitioner-Defendants, I am inclined to quash this order with directions to file detailed additional affidavit to justify the causes in details with material. The Court be reconsider the said ground and reasons and pass appropriate order after hearing both the parties. This is, however, subject to costs of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) to be paid to the Respondents on or before 28/10/2008 as a condition precedent. 3. In view of this, the Writ Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), but with above direction. ( ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)