1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3800/2007. Prahlad Kumar Darra and Another. VERSUS Prerna alias Sulochna and Others. 16.02.2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DALIP SINGH Ms.Kamla Jain, for the petitioners. Mr.S.S.Yadav, for the respondents. ***** Heard learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition has been filed by the defendants No.2 and 3 challenging the order dated 11.04.2007 passed by the learned trial court refusing to take the written statement filed by the petitioners on record. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners did not file the written statement after 17.05.2003 on account of the fact that on the next date i.e. on 08.07.2003, the Presiding Officer remained on leave. Thereafter, the case was fixed for 19.08.2003, on which date the case was transferred to another court and the next date fixed was 01.09.2003. On this date the Presiding Officer was again on leave. The next date fixed was 15.10.2003 and on this date the written statement was filed by the defendants. Learned counsel submitted that on account of the 2 fact that case was transferred and the Presiding Officer was on leave, the written statement was not filed, though it was ready. Learned counsel submitted that on account of the aforesaid circumstances, the petitioner was prevented from filing the written statement, as has been stated above. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that between the period 17.05.2003 to 15.10.2003, no progress was made in the proceedings in the suit and, therefore, the plaintiff did not suffer on account of the fact that written statement was not filed. I have considered the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and I find that it may be that the petitioner was labouring under some misconception but in view of the specific directions, which were issued by the court on 17.05.2003, it was the duty of the petitioner to have complied with the same and filed the written statement, as directed. Be that as it may, the sanctity of the provisions of law and the orders passed by the learned trial court were to be maintained by the parties and it was not open for the parties to sit over the orders passed by the learned trial court. In the facts and circumstances in the interest of justice, while setting aside the impugned order dated 11.04.2007, it is hereby directed that the written statement filed by the petitioner would be taken on 3 record subject to the payment of cost of Rs.2,000/-, as condition precedent, to the plaintiff. Subject to the above, this writ petition stands disposed of. (DALIP SINGH),J. Solanki DS, Jr.P.A.