1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1890 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO.662 OF 2000. Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd and Anr. : Plaintiffs. Versus Mr.Ashok Advani & ors. : Defendants. Mr.Vinayak Shete i/by Poorvi Kamani for the Plaintiffs. Mr.Amin Kherada for Defendant Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5. CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J DATED : DECEMBER 16, 2008 P.C. 1. By the above Notice of Motion, the Defendant Nos.1,2, 4 and 5 seek the following reliefs :- (a) that the Hon'ble Court be pleased to condone the delay of 217 days in taking out the Notice of Motion 2 (b) that the Hon'ble Court be pleased to set aside order dated 27.09.2007 passed in Suit No.662 of 2000 as to transfer of suit to the list of undefended suit against Defendant Nos.1 and 2. (c) that the Hon'ble Court be pleased to permit the Defendant Nos.1 and 2 to file their Written Statement dated 7.4.2008. 2. It is the case of the Defendant Nos.1 and 2, as made out in Paragraph No.4 of the Affidavit in Support of the Notice of Motion, that the writ of summons was served upon the said Defendants on 15.3.2000 in the office of the Defendant No.1. The reason why the written statement has not been filed is that the Defendant No.1 was required to face several court cases on account of the financial crisis faced by the Defendants and, consequently, the writ of summons went unnoticed and the matter remained to be attended. 3. It appears that the matter had appeared before the 3 Learned Prothonotary and Senior Master on 27.9.2007 and an order came to be passed by the learned Prothonotary and the Senior Master on the said day that in so far as Defendant Nos.1 and 2 are concerned, the suit was to be proceeded with as “Undefended Suit”. The Defendant Nos.1 and 2, therefore, contended that the delay is from 27.9.2007 and is of 217 days, in fact, by their own admission in para 4 the writ of summons was served on the said Defendants on 15.3.2000, there is a delay of 2942 days in filing the written statement. 4. Be that as it may, in my view, the Defendant Nos.1 and 2 are required to be granted an opportunity to defend the above suit, but that would be subject to payment of costs which would be a condition precedent. 5. The above Notice of Motion is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b) and (c) subject to payment of costs of Rs.20,000/- to be paid by the Defendant Nos.1 and 2 to the Plaintiffs as a condition precedent within a period of four weeks from date. Only after the said Defendant Nos.1 and 2 produce the receipt for 4 payment of costs to the Plaintiff No.1 that the office to take on record the written statement of the said Defendant Nos.1 and 2. The Notice of Motion is accordingly disposed of. [R.M.SAVANT, J]