1 WP498/11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 498 OF 2011 Narhari s/o Bansi Nagargoje & Ors Petitioners V E R S U S Pratibha w/o Balaprasad Lohya & Ors Respondents Shri S.S. Jadhavar, Advocate for the petitioners Shri V.B. Deshmukh, Adv for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 Shri S.G. Kawade, Advocate, instructed by Shri S.J. Salunke, Advocate for respondent Nos. 8 and 9 Shri M.B. Kolpe, Advocate for respondent Nos. 4 to 6 CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 20th October, 2011 PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. This writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenges three orders passed at interim stage by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Majalgaon, District Beed, in Special Civil Suit No. 28 of 2009. 3. The first order passed on Exhibit No. 22, dated 10th June, 2010. The order is quite peculiar and so was the application on which the order was passed. In this suit, some defendants (petitioner Nos. 2 & 3 and respondent No. 7) are minor. When the suit was filed by respondent Nos. 1 to 3, they impleaded the above mentioned minor defendants through their natural guardians as their guardians. However, after summons was properly served on the guardians of the minor defendants, they did not take steps for filing of the written statement, and so, the Court passed an order of no-written- statement filed, against them. Thereafter, respondent Nos. 1 to 3 / plaintiffs 2 WP498/11 out of anxiety make the application (Exhibit No. 22) and sought appointment of different guardian for minor defendants. Such an application was not maintainable in view of provisions of Rule 3 of Order XXXII of the Code of Civil Procedure, because the minor defendants were already under the guardianship of their natural guardians. This order should therefore be set aside. The amount of Rs.1,000/- deposited by respondent Nos. 1 to 3 towards fee of the guardian shall be refunded to them. 4. The second order was passed on Exhibit No. 29 – D, which was moved by the minor defendants for setting aside the earlier order passed on Exhibit No. 22. But, in view of the above order, the application at Exhibit No. 29 – D is infructuous. 5. The third order is the order passed by the learned Judge of the trial Court prohibiting the petitioners / defendants from filing written statement beyond the time limit given for filing written statement. Similarly placed defendants in this very suit were given such permission earlier by this Court on payment of costs of Rs.10,000/-. But, in this case, since the facts are little different, I am inclined to allow the petitioners to file written statement, provided they pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) as costs to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 / plaintiffs. The costs shall be paid within three weeks from today or shall be deposited in the lower Court on or before 16th November, 2011. In view of above, writ petition stands disposed of. ( A.V. NIRGUDE, J. ) SRM/wp/498/11/20/10/11 3 WP498/11