1 Ash IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1344 OF 2010 Shalan Dhondiram Dengre. .. Petitioner Vs Shri Arvind @ Baban Vitthal Lokande. .. Respondent ­­ Shri Nagesh Chavan for the Petitioner. Shri Vikas Kolekar for the Respondent. ­­ CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 6TH APRIL, 2010 P.C: . A notice for final disposal at admission stage was issued. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent. The Petitioner is the Defendant and the Respondent is the Plaintiff. An application was made by the Petitioner at Exhibit­17 for setting aside an order to proceed with the suit without written statement and for taking the written statement on record which was tendered along with the said application. In the said application, it was stated that the Petitioner had undergone a surgery and that is one of the reasons for delay in filing the written statement. It was stated that the relevant documents were not available. By the impugned order, the application has been rejected on the ground that no exceptional reasons have been set out in the application. The learned Trial Judge observed 2 that there is no evidence on record to show that the Petitioner had undergone a surgery. 2. The Apex Court has held that Rule 1 of Order VIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is directory in nature and that if the exceptional circumstances or exceptional reasons are established, for the reasons recorded, the Trial Court can extend the time for filing the written statement. Though the Petitioner has stated in the application that she had undergone a surgery, it appears that no documents were produced in support of the said contention. Moreover, the application appears to be cryptic. This is a case where an opportunity deserves to be granted to the Petitioner to file a fresh application giving detailed reasons and particulars. The Petitioner can also produce documents in support of the application. 3. Hence, the Petition is disposed of by passing the following order. (a) The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The application at Exhibit­17 is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh application. (b) It will be open for the Petitioner to file a fresh application within a period of two weeks from the date on which a writ of this order is received by the Trial 3 Court. (c) It will be also open for the Petitioner to file documents in support of the application along with the affidavit in support thereof. The Respondent will be entitled to file a reply to the said application. (d) All contentions of the parties on such fresh application are kept open. (e) If a fresh application is made within the stipulated time as above, the Trial Court will not proceed with the suit and will decide the said application as expeditiously as possible without being influenced by the impugned order. (f) The Respondent is entitled to withdraw a sum of Rs. 5,000/­ deposited by the Petitioner in this Court towards the cost payable to the Respondent. (g) The Petition is partly allowed in above terms. (A.S.OKA, J)