1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY: NAGPUR BENCH: NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 990/2009 [Mahesh Masodkar ..vs.. Mahadeorao Kinkhede] ===================================== CORAM: S.R. DONGAONKAR, J. DATE:6.3.2009 . Heard Miss. Mukta Pathak, Advocate for the petitioner. Petitioner is challenging the order passed by the 7th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nagpur dated 30.9.2008, whereby the filing of the written statement by the respondent/ defendant therein was allowed after about 15 days from the expiry of period of 90 days. Said application was allowed subject to cost of Rs.250/-. 2] Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the delay should not have been condoned and the defendant should not have been allowed to file written statement, as it was delayed. So the said order be quashed and set aside 3] The reasons recorded by the learned trial court are thus: “5- Though there are no grounds submitted by the defendant to show the delay was justified, I am of the opinion that there is mere delay of 10 days. Since it is argued by Shri Khati advocate for the defendant that he is having good defence to resist the claim of plaintiff, I am of the opinion that mere technicality should not defeat the rights of the parties. Since no prejudice would 2 be caused to the plaintiff and both parties are at liberty to adduce their evidence and to cross examine each other, in my consideration, application can be allowed.” 4] I do not see any reason to interfere with the said order in extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this court. No prejudice seems to have been caused to the petitioner. It appears that defendant was allowed to file written statement in order to allow the matter to be decided on merits, even though suitable application was not made. Petition is therefore dismissed. No order as to costs. JUDGE smp.