: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2773 OF 2008 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2773 OF 2008 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2773 OF 2008 IN IN IN SUIT NO.4018 of 1992 SUIT NO.4018 of 1992 SUIT NO.4018 of 1992 M/s.Tata Sons Limited .. Plaintiffs. Versus Ashok Chatterjee .. Defendant. Ms.Bachani i/b.M/s.I.R.Joshi for plaintiffs. Ms.Dave for defendant. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATE : 11th August, 2008. DATE : 11th August, 2008. DATE : 11th August, 2008. P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. The plaintiffs, who are the defendants to the counter claim filed by original defendant did not file written statement within the stipulated time and hence the present plaintiffs have taken out this Notice of Motion No.2773 of 2008 for condoning the delay in filing the written statement and take the written statement on record. 2. Affidavit-in-reply is filed by the defendant. 3. I have heard learned Advocates on both the sides. : 2 : The plaintiffs were served with the copy of the written statement cum counter claim on 22.9.1993 and hence it was necessary to file their written statement within 45 days from 22.9.1993. That has not been done. 4. The explanation for not filing the written statement at all is found in para 2 of the affidavit in support of the motion, namely, defendants to the counter claim felt that the written statement is not required to be filed. It appears that after a long delay of about 15 years, the plaintiffs have been advised by their Advocate on record that the written statement is required to be filed and hence this motion is taken out in the year 2008. No doubt, the defendants have opposed this motion. In my view, rather than dismissing this motion, it would be proper if the written statement is permitted to be filed on record by putting the plaintiffs to costs. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to fix the quantified costs of Rs.5,000/- to be paid to the defendant by the plaintiffs. With this, written statement can be taken on record. Hence the order:- : 3 : O R D E R O R D E R O R D E R i) The Notice of Motion No.2773 of 2008 is made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). ii) Sofar as costs is concerned, plaintiffs to pay to defendant quantified costs of Rs.5,000/-. iii) Learned Advocate for the plaintiffs states that the plaintiffs will pay the costs to the defendant by 22.8.2008. Accordingly, costs to be paid to the defendant by 22.8.2008. Plaintiffs’ Advocate to draw a cheque in the name of the defendant and deliver it to the Advocate for the defendant. Written statement tendered by the plaintiffs is taken on record subject of course plaintiffs complying with the payment of costs. 7. Suit is now set down for directions on 25.8.2008. : 4 : (R.Y. GANOO,J.) (R.Y. GANOO,J.) (R.Y. GANOO,J.)