1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Amk NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1387 OF 2010 IN SUIT NO. 3128 OF 1996 Manju Sureshchandra Upadhyaya .. Plaintiff Versus Ashok Sureshchandra Upadhyaya & Ors. .. Defendants The Plaintiff present in person. Mr. Percy Ghandy with Mr. M. G. Gawde for Deft. No.5. Mr. M. V. Jayakar for Defendant Nos. 7 to 9. Ms. Madhavi Mahadik h/o Vinay B. Kanoria for Defendant Nos. 3 & 4 CORAM : MRS. R. S. DALVI, J. DATE : 25th June, 2010. P.C. 1. For the reasons dictated in my order dated 17th June, 2010, which need not be repeated, after the adjournment of the Notice of Motion was granted, the Written Statement of Defendant Nos. 3 & 4, which was prepared in 2001 but not affirmed, and of Defendant Nos. 7 to 9, which is sought to have been filed in the registry on 21st June, 2010, are taken on record subject to payment of costs of Rs.2,000/- by Defendant Nos. 3 & 4 and Rs. 2,000/- by Defendant Nos.7 to 9 to the Plaintiff in the suit. The Plaintiff protests about the fact that the written statement cannot be accepted after 90 days under the amended Order 8 Rule 1 of 2 the Code of Civil Procedure. The said Order is held not to have application to the Bombay High Court under the rules framed by it in the Judgment in the case of Iridium India Ltd. Vs. Motorola Inc. (AIR 2005 SUPREME COURT 514). Hence the written statements are required to be accepted in the interest of justice. 2. The Defendants shall serve copies of the Written Statement upon the Plaintiff along with the payment costs ordered to be paid. 3. The Notice of Motion is disposed of accordingly. 4. The Plaintiff applies for stay of this order. The Application for stay is refused. ( R. S. DALVI, J.)