:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE OF MOTION NO.845 OF 2007 OF MOTION NO.845 OF 2007 OF MOTION NO.845 OF 2007 IN IN IN SUIT SUIT SUIT NO.2568 OF 1989 NO.2568 OF 1989 NO.2568 OF 1989 Consolidated Power Systems Pvt. Ltd. ..plaintiffs V/s Jai Industries ..Defendants None for the plaintiffs Ms Seema Sarnaik for the Defendants CORAM ; A.A.SAYED, J. DATE : 16TH JANUARY, 2009 P.C. 1. This motion has been taken out by the defendants to take their written statement on record. The motion is taken out some time in January, 2007. Along with it a short affidavit in support, bereft of necessary particulars / details, was filed. By order dated 04-06-2007, this Court observed that the affidavit in support does not make out sufficient cause and on the request of the learned Counsel for the defendant, time was granted to file additional affidavit within two weeks. 2. Thereafter when the matter was heard on 19-06-2007, the Court recorded that since the :2: Advocate for the plaintiffs has already expired, the defendants were directed to serve the copy of the motion and the additional affidavit directly on the plaintiffs. Office of this Court was also directed to issue a notice to the plaintiffs to take steps to appoint another advocate. The learned Counsel for the defendants states that the plaintiffs have been served and affidavit of service has been filed. The office report indicates that the plaintiffs have been duly served with the office notice also, whereby they are informed that they should take necessary steps to appoint another advocate. 3. When the matter was called out neither the plaintiffs’ representative nor their advocate is present. The learned Counsel for the defendants has invited my attention to the additional affidavit which has been filed on behalf of the defendants, which sets out the reasons for non filing of the written statement earlier. The main reason stated in the affidavit for not having filed the written statement earlier, was that no copy of the plaint was annexed to the writ of summons. In spite of letters written by the Advocate for the defendants to the :3: then Advocate Mr. Cosmos D’Souza for the plaintiffs, no copy of the plaint was forwarded either to the defendants or their Advocate. Ultimately, the defendants obtained a copy of the plaint by filing an application for certified copy of the plaint in this Court. 4. The leaned Counsel for the defendants states that the written statement is ready and it is only because of non supply of the copy of the plaint there has been delay in filing the written statement. In spite of notice none appears on behalf of the plaintiffs nor any affidavit-in-reply is filed controverting the facts stated in the additional affidavit. In the circumstances, the explanation given by the defendant for not having filed written statement earlier, is accepted. 5. The notice of motion is made absolute. The written statement to be filed by the defendants within one week from today. 6. Notice of Motion stands disposed of. :4: ( A.A. SAYED, J.) A.A. SAYED, J.) A.A. SAYED, J.)