1 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.88/2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.109/2009 The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. ..Appellant -VERSUS- Ushadevi Gulati and others. ..Respondents .......... Ms.K.K.Sorran, Advocate for the Appellant. Ms.Radhika Samant, Advocate h/f Mr.P.M.Havnur, Advocate for the Respondents. .......... CORAM : R.V.MORE, J. DATED : 15th APRIL, 2009. P.C.: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. By the impugned order dated 09.06.2008, the notice of motion for setting aside “no written statement order” was rejected. 3. The Respondent/Plaintiff filed L.C. Suit No.661/2004 challenging the notices under Sections 314 and 351. The Respondent 2 also took out the notice of motion for temporary injunction during the pendency of suit. The said Notice of Motion was kept for hearing. During the pendency of notice of motion, no written statement order was passed and the suit was listed for hearing. Therefore, the Appellant/Defendant filed the Notice of Motion No.712/2008 for permission to file the Written Statement. This notice of motion was rejected as stated above. 4. The learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant/Defendant is a Corporation and it is a public body having vast organization. It was further submitted that due to heavy work load and transfer of advocate and the Manager Clerk from time to time, the written statement could not be filed within time. 5. The learned counsel for the Respondent/Plaintiff submitted that the Respondent has no objection if the Appellant/Defendant is permitted to file the Written Statement. 6. In view of the concession given by the Respondent, I dispose of the Appeal From Order by passing the following order:- The impugned order dated 09.06.2008 rejecting Notice of Motion No.712/2008 is quashed and set aside and the Appellant' s Notice of Motion No.712/2008 is allowed in terms of it' s prayer clauses-A and B. The Appellant/Defendant shall file the Written Statement within a period of four weeks from today. Looking into the nature of dispute and the controversy involved in the suit, the Trial Court is directed to dispose of L.C. Suit 3 No.661/2004 as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of one year from the date of receipt of this order. Accordingly, the Appeal From Order is disposed of. In view of disposal of the appeal, Civil Application does not survive and the same is also disposed of. JUDGE