mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.427 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO.1886 of 1987 Umesh Bhanjibhai Yadav .. Plaintiff versus Dr.Jyoti A. Solanki & ors. .. Defendants ... Mr.Ravi P. Kadam i/b M/s.Thakordas Madgavkar for applicant defendant in support of Notice of Motion. Mr.Cyrus Ardeshir i/b Pandya & Gandhi & Co. for plaintiffs. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 22nd June 2009 P.C:- 1. This motion is taken out by the heirs of original defendant no.1 for taking their written statement on record by condoning the delay. 2. Learned counsel for the defendant objects for condonation of delay and submits that delay has not been satisfactorily explained. 3. The heirs of original defendant no.1 in their affidavit has stated that they reside at different places and some of them reside out of India and therefore delay has been caused. In my view, the delay has been thus sufficiently explained. 4. Further more, counsel for the heirs of original defendant no.11 submits that in the proposed written statement they want to adopt the written statement filed by the original defendant and are not raising any derogatory pleas nor raising any additional grounds. In my view, motion can be allowed. 5. Motion is accordingly allowed and applicants are permitted to file additional written statement which shall be filed within two weeks. (D.G. KARNIK, J)