: 1 : 7279-11-wp=.sxw USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7279 OF 2011 Rameshchandra Baijnath Kahar & Anr. .. Petitioners v/s. Premchand Baijnath Kahar .. Respondent ......... Mr. S.S. Mishra for the petitioners ......... CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J DATE : 5th SEPTEMBER,2011. P.C. : 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners. The petitioners who were defendant nos. 2 and 3 before the City Civil Court in Suit No.437 of 2006 were to file written statement on or before 15th June, 2006. That was not done. Thereafter, the petitioners took out Notice of Motion No. 990 of 2011 praying that the petitioners be permitted to file written statement. Learned Judge of the City Civil Court has by his order dated 1st August, 2011 dismissed the said motion and prayer for time to file written statement is rejected. : 2 : 7279-11-wp=.sxw 2. I have perused the Roznama attached to the petition. It is clear that the petitioners remained absent before the said Court from time to time. On 14th December, 2010 the learned Judge had directed that the written statement should be filed on 7th February, 2011. On 7th February, 2011 none of the petitioners appeared before the Court and hence, learned Judge of the City Civil Court was pleased to pass the order so as to post the matter for ex-parte decree. Thereafter, on 3rd March, 2011, matter was adjourned for recording of evidence. 3. Learned advocate for the petitioners contended that the wife of the advocate for the petitioners was suffering from cancer and, therefore, written statement could not be filed. In my view, the petitioners have not explained as to why they could not file the proper written statement within the stipulated time. The reasons mentioned across the bar cannot be considered as good reasons. It was open for the petitioners to see that the written statement is filed with the help of the advocate to whom they had engaged or they should have made some alternate arrangement. There is a delay of about 5 years. : 3 : 7279-11-wp=.sxw 4. Apart from this, by 25th November, 2010, the learned Judge of the City Civil Court had considered the facts and had permitted the petitioners to file written statement. That was not done till 7th February, 2011. Hence, he was required to pass the order setting down the matter for ex- parte. Looking to all the facts, no infirmity is found in the impugned order which is challenged in this petition. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. In the facts and circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. (R.Y.GANOO, J.)