1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2086 OF 2010 Bhagwanrao Nivratti Mane, Age 66 years, Occu. Nil, R/o Vittal Zopadpatti Tuljapur, Tq. Tuljapur, District Osmanabad ... PETITIONER VERSUS Malan Sidram Nakate, Age 48 years, Occu.Service, R/o Vithal Zopadpatti, Tuljapur, Tq. Tuljapur, District Osmanabad, At present Primary Health Centre, Borali, Tq. Mangalwedha, District Solapur. ... RESPONDENT ..... Shri V.B. Deshmukh, Advocate for the petitioner Shri K.S. Bhore, Advocate for the respondent ..... CORAM : A.A. SAYED, J. DATE : 24th November, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for the parties. 2. The trial Court, by its order dated 29.9.2009, refused permission to the petitioner (original defendant) to file written statement in the suit on the ground that the written statement was filed at a belated stage without permission of the Court. This order is subject matter of challenge in the 2 above petition. 3. It is, noticed that, on 19.6.2009, the trial Court itself on the application of the petitioner to grant time to file written statement, had passed following order : "Last chance granted." 4. The matter was accordingly posted on 27.7.2009. On that day, the petitioner presented the written statement and the trial Court adjourned the matter for orders on 29.9.2009. On that day, the Trial Court passed the impugned order, refusing permission to file the written statement on the ground that it was filed belatedly without permission of the Court. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, in my view, the trial Court once having allowed the petitioner’s application and granted last chance to the petitioner to file the written statement, it ought not to have refused to take the written statement on file on the next adjourned date . Implicit in the impugned order of granting last chance was the fact that permission was granted by the Court to file the written statement on the next date and the delay, if any, stood condoned. 3 6. In the circumstances, the trial Court clearly fell in error in passing the impugned order. The Writ Petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer Clause (C), which reads as under: (C) By issue of writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or directions, the order dated 29.9.2009 below Exh. 18 in R.C.S. No.38/2009 passed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Tuljapur may kindly be quashed and set aside. The written statement shall be deemed to have been filed. No order as to costs. A.A. SAYED JUDGE