ssm sm sm IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 4786 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 4786 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 4786 OF 2008 Smt.Sunanda Kisan Mohite & Ors. ...Petitioners. Vs. Shri Maruti Baburao Kedari ...Respondent. Mr.N.R.Lad for the Petitioners. Mr.D.M.Gupte for the Respondent. CORAM CORAM CORAM : : : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. DATED DATED DATED : 14th November, 2008. : 14th November, 2008. : 14th November, 2008. P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- The Petitioners-Defendants have challenged two interlocutory orders in this Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. An application for setting aside the No W.S. order Exhibit 45 and an application to accept W.S. on record Exhibit 44. Both the applications are rejected rightly as the Defendants’ application for accepting the written statement beyond the stipulated time was rejected on 07/12/2006. The said order remained unchallenged. An application to set aside the No W.S. order filed on 07/03/2007 was also rejected by order dated 30/03/2007 which was also not challenged for ( 2 ) long time. The matter was proceeded. The evidence of Plaintiff and his witnesses was recorded. The Petitioners-Defendents cross-examined them. The Defendants’ application for allowing to lead evidence was also rejected on 4/12/2007. The matter was fixed for arguments. The Defendants filed written notes of argument on 12/03/2008. The arguments were heard. In this clear background, the learned Judge therefore, rightly rejected both these applications as there is no sufficient case and reason made out by the Petitioners. On the contrary the conduct so recorded above, is sufficient to hold that the Defendant is not interested in the matter and negligent throughout. There is no sufficient case made out. The impugned orders are within framework of law and record. 3. The Petition is therefore, dismissed. ( ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)